Confused Posted November 18, 2024 Posted November 18, 2024 (edited) “The great poet in writing himself writes his time.” - T.S. Eliot, “Shakespeare and the Stoicism of Seneca” In his four-part essay, “Postmodernism in Fantasy,” Brandon labels himself a postmodern writer. (Here, here, here, and here.) He describes Mistborn as his attempt to “consciously [take] aspects of the fantasy epic and twist them about.” His book pitch: “The hero failed; this is a thousand years later.” For The Stormlight Archives he tries a different tack. “I decided that I would not write The Way of Kings as a postmodern epic. (Not intentionally, at least.)” And yet, in deconstructing Brandon, I think that’s exactly what he does; he writes a postmodern epic that will endure on the bookshelf next to Tolkien’s modern classic. This post tries to show how the postmodern sensibility permeates SLA. Despite his personal aesthetic hopes, I believe Brandon falls subject to Eliot’s dictum in the epigraph: “The great poet in writing himself writes his time,” in this case the time of postmodernism. I placed this post on this Forum because I raise two WaT questions at the end. I also like writing for you guys. You’re a sharp, clever bunch with excellent ideas. Hopefully you won’t mind (too much) my intellectual self-indulgence. Deconstructing Brandon This is my 500th post. Maybe that’s not much by most people’s standards over my ten year tenure here, but I celebrate it. I decided to go off track and write about Brandon as writer rather than about what he’s written. In Brandon’s words, Quote Deconstructionism is a cornerstone of postmodern literary theory... It’s when you point out that a story is relyin’ on the same thing it’s denyin’. Postmodernism in Fantasy, Sept. 12, 2010. Unfortunately, that means I have to wade through the meaning of postmodernism and some other ideas. Please forgive my pedantry. I find cultural, artistic, and philosophical ideas fascinating. It’s one reason I enjoy Brandon. But maybe you don’t share my fascination. Bear with me anyway. Let’s start with the T.S. Eliot quote. Most people know Eliot from the musical Cats. He’s a significant early 20th century poet (The Wasteland, Four Quartets) and an even more significant literary critic. He wrote literary reviews for The Times of London for many years. (And for the curious few who know his early poem “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock,” J. Alfred Prufrock was the name of a lumberyard near Eliot’s childhood home in St. Louis.) In the epigraph’s cited 1927 essay, Eliot says that the poet’s task is primarily emotional, not intellectual. He compares Dante’s The Divine Comedy – which reflects Thomas Aquinas’s highly structured philosophy – with Shakespeare’s plays, which mirror the English Renaissance’s more muddled sensibilities. Eliot argues that Dante is not greater than Shakespeare simply because the ideas of early 14th century Italy might be “greater” than the ideas of early 17th century England: Quote [Shakespeare’s] is equally great poetry, though the philosophy behind it is not great. But the essential is, that each expresses in perfect language, some permanent human impulse. Eliot concludes in the epigraph’s quote: “The great poet, in writing himself, writes his time.” The artist is a prism who refracts current ideas to “express in perfect language” some permanent aspect of the human condition. The available ideas serve as fodder for the art. Art, in other words, is separate from the ideas and circumstances that spawn it. I’m fully aware of the irony of citing modern literary critic Eliot – the founder of the New Criticism – to deconstruct Brandon. We and Brandon live in the postmodern age. Whatever that means... The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy “defines” postmodernism with standard philosophic incomprehensibility: Quote That postmodernism is indefinable is a truism. However, it can be described as a set of critical, strategic and rhetorical practices employing concepts such as difference, repetition, the trace, the simulacrum, and hyperreality to destabilize other concepts such as presence, identity, historical progress, epistemic certainty, and the univocity of meaning. Strip away the highfalutin language and you get a “system” that doesn’t believe in systems. IMO, our postmodern age undermines belief in the efficacy of theory and “big picture” solutions. The Shard Cultivation, for example, reflects a modern sensibility, a confidence in systems that can solve large problems. Taravangian reflects more of a postmodern sensibility: “Let me do it. I know what’s best to get things done.” It’s not so much his personal self-confidence as his unwillingness to rely on proven solutions. This disbelief in large “-isms” shows up in the multiple philosophies and ideologies SLA presents. Brandon says he is a storyteller solving his characters’ emotional issues; the cosmere stuff is just background. Yet the cosmere’s built on multiple intertwined idea systems. Brandon expressly acknowledges Plato’s, Spinoza’s and Jung’s contributions to his “mashed up metaphysics” (as well as Asian spirituality – spren – and other influences). His reference to “mashed up” shows how non-systemic his ideas are. Plato, Spinoza, Descartes, Jung, and even Milton, for example, are all represented in the cosmere. Plato’s concept of an unseen “ideal” reality – Platonic “dualism” – underlies the whole structure of the cosmere. That is what the Cognitive and Spiritual Realms are – alternate unseen realities. Like the people who live in Plato’s allegorical “Cave,” most non-magical Physical Realm people can’t see beyond their own shadows and echoes to the “true,” the ideal. The Spiritual Realm is an example of Plato’s theory of forms. Spinoza equates God and “nature,” claiming they are the same fundamental substance governed by one set of rules. Spinoza says everything in the universe is one substance. There is no concept of matter (or energy). Everything is made from the same stuff, changeable in form and function. Brandon seems to adopt Spinoza’s view by creating the cosmere from Investiture that converts into everything else (and back again). Spinoza rejects Descartes’ depiction of the mind-body-spirit mix; Spinoza believes these are all one thing. Brandon’s postmodernism embraces both Spinoza’s “one substance” and Descartes’ version of Platonic dualism despite their apparent contradiction. Brandon says Jung’s concept of the collective unconscious inspires his idea of Listener non-verbal communication. Listeners’ bonded spren enable their common “chanting” and mass communication. Unlike Freud who breaks down the mind into id, ego, and superego, Jung conceptualizes the unconscious mind as consisting of two components: the personal and the collective. The personal unconscious reflects our individual experiences, while culture expresses the collective unconscious. The collective unconscious is a place of “archetypes” – cultural memes often from myths and legends. Archetypes resemble Spiritual Realm ideals, and the collective unconscious resembles the Cognitive Realm’s subastrals. Deconstructing Brandon, I cannot avoid John Milton. This is the third or fourth time I suggest Brandon adopts phrases from Paradise Lost to describe Roshar’s desolations. It may have been inadvertent. You decide. Here’s Milton’s depiction of Hell: Quote The Sulphurous Hail Shot after us in storm, o’erblown hath laid The fiery Surge, that from the Precipice Of Heav'n receiv'd us falling, and the Thunder, Wing'd with red Lightning and impetuous rage, Perhaps hath spent his shafts, and ceases now To bellow through the vast and boundless Deep. Let us not slip th’ occasion, whether scorn, Or satiate fury yield it from our Foe. Seest thou yon dreary Plain, forlorn and wild, The seat of desolation, void of light…” Book I, lines 171-181 (emphasis added). Surges, red lightning, “impetuous rage” (Adolin), a wild and dreary [shattered] plain that’s the seat of desolations and voids? All in one verse?! Postmodern deconstructionists cheer! SLA is a postmodern pastiche of literary and philosophic ideas. But Brandon’s scientific substructure makes SLA special. Many Sci-Fi/Fantasy writers combine science with magic. None to my knowledge do it like Brandon. Almost every aspect of the cosmere can be scientifically rationalized and seamlessly integrated into cosmere magic. Brandon “unites them” – science, philosophy, and art – to create “something new”: Quote Mistborn felt, in part, like a reflection. There were many original parts, but at its core it was a study of the genre, and—to succeed at its fullest—it needed an audience who understood the tropes I was twisting about. Instead of making its own lasting impression and improvement on the genre, it rested upon the work done by others. In short, I feel that using that same process again would make it a crutch to me. There is nothing at all wrong with what Mistborn did. I’m very proud of it, and I think it took some important steps. But it’s not what I want to be known for, not solely. I don’t just want to reflect and study; I want to create. I want to write something that says, “Here is my addition, my tiny step forward, in the genre that I love. Postmodernism in Fantasy: An Essay by Brandon Sanderson, Sept. 12, 2010. An interesting statement. Here’s what our friend T.S. Eliot says about the creation of something “really new.” Quote No poet, no artist of any art, has his complete meaning alone. His significance, his appreciation is the appreciation of his relation to the dead poets and artists. You cannot value him alone; you must set him, for contrast and comparison, among the dead. I mean this as a principle of æsthetic, not merely historical, criticism. The necessity that he shall conform, that he shall cohere, is not one-sided; what happens when a new work of art is created is something that happens simultaneously to all the works of art which preceded it. The existing monuments form an ideal order among themselves, which is modified by the introduction of the new (the really new) work of art among them. The existing order is complete before the new work arrives; for order to persist after the supervention of novelty, the whole existing order must be, if ever so slightly, altered; and so the relations, proportions, values of each work of art toward the whole are readjusted; and this is conformity between the old and the new. Whoever has approved this idea of order, of the form of European, of English literature, will not find it preposterous that the past should be altered by the present as much as the present is directed by the past. And the poet who is aware of this will be aware of great difficulties and responsibilities. T.S. Eliot, “Tradition and the Individual Talent” (1919). (Bold added) What is “really new” about SLA that’s missing in Mistborn? I think it’s the comprehensiveness of Brandon’s vision, telling the story he wants to tell in a literary form no one’s ever used before. He still uses tropes and archetypes. Kaladin’s storyline resembles Rafael Sabatini’s Captain Blood – a physician turned slave turned pirate captain turned governor. People kill God – not 1,000 years before the story begins but 10,000 years. New gods arise to fight among themselves. Etc. Etc. But (IMO) Brandon presents his story in a deeply woven, tightly interlaced, highly structured form not seen before in the Sci-Fi/Fantasy genre. Let’s start with the “comprehensiveness of vision” bit. Brandon conceives a self-contained universe from creation to a distant future yet to be written (or at least published). Along the way the people who become Vessels kill their Creator because they want access to more magic. The Vessels start killing each other. Mortals gain the ability to direct magic. Non-magical people learn to create magical tools. The cosmere undergoes a technological revolution based on magic. War among planets ensues as the technologically stronger planets compete for more access to Investiture. And somehow Brandon will resolve this magical mess in a deeply satisfying way. The History of the Cosmere from Big Bang to Bust in 37-plus major books. Easy. The man does have ambition... Structurally, SLA forms the spine of Brandon’s saga. Two five-book series separated by a five-plus year hiatus. I urge you to look at the Coppermind’s description of SLA’s structure – layer upon layer upon layer of very specific order. Here’s a sample: Quote The novels of The Stormlight Archive follow a consistent internal structure. Each is split into five parts, and Brandon plots each novel as if it were an entire trilogy. The names of each part, when put together, form a ketek. Between each part is a set of interludes, set in different points of view, which show events in other locations on Roshar. Each novel has one character who gets multiple interludes, whose interludes effectively form a novella. The books also feature several pieces of in-world art on the endpages and between some chapters, and epigraphs from in-world documents at the start of each non-flashback chapter.[2][3] Each of the first five books begins with a prologue that shows a different character's perspective of the night of the assassination of Gavilar and ends with an epilogue from Hoid's point of view.[4][5] Each book also includes an Ars Arcanum. The tight tie between Brandon’s storytelling and the series’ structure IMO IS Brandon’s new form. The books are each a ketek and, I believe, each 5-book series is itself a ketek. Not (just) the book titles, but their content. I think Brandon’s early foreshadowing follows a predetermined path to later resolution. Numerology figures large in the cosmere mythos. Brandons links stories and events throughout the larger cosmere saga like quantum entanglements – unnoticeable until something happens and we see the Connections after the fact. These are his “easter eggs.” The grandness of his vision reminds me of Richard Wagner’s concept of “total art” – the full integration of music, drama, and staging exemplified by his Ring Trilogy. WaT promises to be Brandon’s best book yet, the high point of a journey with a half-way destination. I can’t wait to read the telling. Who’s Your Kandra? Since my “Mraize is a Sleepless” theory died a WoB death, I now suggest Mraize is a kandra. Iyatil says about Mraize: Quote “Something is wrong with him,” Iyatil said softly. “I do not think he has been replaced with a duplicate, but I do question his loyalty to our cause.” WaT, Chapter 26. Clearly Iyatil should question Mraize’s loyalty. But I put her statement together with the disappearance of Mraize’s Aviar. These two events suggest a kandra first ate and became the Aviar, then ate and became Mraize. This Mraize IS a duplicate. And Harmony now knows an awful lot about Roshar. We’ll see... A Call “Beyond Honor” In WaT Chapter 25 (bold added), Dalinar says, Quote I feel that something has been guiding me all this time. Something I can’t explain, something beyond Honor. This phrase underlies my evolving Rosharan “old gods” theory. I think Dalinar becomes the living planet Roshar’s Bondsmith like Kaladin becomes Wind’s Bondsmith and Rock and Venli become Stone’s Bondsmiths. IOW, Dalinar will be able to wield all 16 of Roshar’s Investitures without regard to Intent. Here’s my question: What else could the bolded phrase mean? I don’t think it refers to the “really, sincerely dead” Adonalsium, nor to the God Beyond. Cultivation and Odium are Roshar’s only other Shards, and they’re both taken. What is “beyond Honor” on Roshar if not the entity Roshar itself? I’m open to suggestions. Thanks again for your indulgence. All the best! C. Edited November 18, 2024 by Confused 15
+Oltux72 he/him Posted November 18, 2024 Posted November 18, 2024 This is quite a bit to go through. Yet I am afraid I must first address the elephant in the room. You are just assuming that the Shattering was the result of a conspiracy of people in it for personal power. That is a big assumption. For all we know Adonalsium was preparing an updated version of mankind, testing the prototypes on Roshar and they acted in self-defense. 6 hours ago, Confused said: This phrase underlies my evolving Rosharan “old gods” theory. I think Dalinar becomes the living planet Roshar’s Bondsmith like Kaladin becomes Wind’s Bondsmith and Rock and Venli become Stone’s Bondsmiths. IOW, Dalinar will be able to wield all 16 of Roshar’s Investitures without regard to Intent. Here’s my question: What else could the bolded phrase mean? I don’t think it refers to the “really, sincerely dead” Adonalsium, nor to the God Beyond. Cultivation and Odium are Roshar’s only other Shards, and they’re both taken. What is “beyond Honor” on Roshar if not the entity Roshar itself? I’m open to suggestions. Whatever gave the Singers the forms of power. It looks like the Cosmere's deities did not just contains Adonalsium prior to the Shattering, but also lesser entities like the Aethers and entities like the Wind. 4
alder24 Posted November 18, 2024 Posted November 18, 2024 Congrats on your 500th post! This was an excellent essay to read. 8 hours ago, Confused said: Along the way the people who become Vessels kill their Creator because they want access to more magic. Some did it for power, some like Hoid did it believing it's "for Adonalsium's own good." SH ch 3-2: Quote “A diverse group,” she said. “With equally diverse motives. Some wished for the power; others saw killing Adonalsium as the only good option left to them." Tress ch 57: Quote “So far as I can tell,” he said, his voice growing very soft. “I’m sorry, Tress. I can’t let you face the Sorceress. I can’t. For your own good, you see.” Ah, those words. I’ve heard those words. I’ve said those words. The words that proclaim, in bald-faced arrogance, “I don’t trust you to make your own decisions.” The words we pretend will soften the blow, yet instead layer condescension on top of already existent pain. Like dirt on a corpse. Oh yes. I’ve said those words. I said them with sixteen other people, in fact. 8 hours ago, Confused said: Who’s Your Kandra? Since my “Mraize is a Sleepless” theory died a WoB death, I now suggest Mraize is a kandra. Iyatil says about Mraize: Quote “Something is wrong with him,” Iyatil said softly. “I do not think he has been replaced with a duplicate, but I do question his loyalty to our cause.” WaT, Chapter 26. Clearly Iyatil should question Mraize’s loyalty. But I put her statement together with the disappearance of Mraize’s Aviar. These two events suggest a kandra first ate and became the Aviar, then ate and became Mraize. This Mraize IS a duplicate. And Harmony now knows an awful lot about Roshar. We’ll see... Good idea. Mraize can be a Kandra, but if Kandra ate his Aviar then Mraize would have known about it as Kandra can't replicate powers of Aviars. But Mraize could have been a Kandra this entire time - and that Kandra can't work for Harmony because MeLaan was the first Kandra sent by Harmony into Cosmere in TLM. We also know from a WoB that there is a Kandra on Roshar who doesn't work for Harmony - Mraize would fit well. Spoiler Questioner If a kandra imitated an Aviar and went and got the parasite, would it be able to mimic the powers? Brandon Sanderson No. Orem Signing (March 16, 2019) Spoiler Nextorl In The Lost Metal, MeLaan is said to be the first kandra Harmony sent off-world. Does that mean that the kandra on Roshar are not in Harmony's employment? Brandon Sanderson Yes! Good way to connect the dots. That is exactly what that means. R'Shara Brandon, you previously said the kandra on Roshar WAS an agent of Harmony. Brandon Sanderson Did I? *sounds uncertain* Well... I'm changing my mind. Yeah. No. I... uhh... Nope, not an agent of- I know exactly who this kandra is and what they're doing and yeah. I'm going to say I don't know why I said that before, but now, no. Footnote: R'Shara is referring to this WOB where Brandon says that the kandra is an agent of Sazed YouTube Spoiler Stream 5 (Dec. 2, 2022) 8 hours ago, Confused said: A Call “Beyond Honor” In WaT Chapter 25 (bold added), Dalinar says, Quote I feel that something has been guiding me all this time. Something I can’t explain, something beyond Honor. This phrase underlies my evolving Rosharan “old gods” theory. I think Dalinar becomes the living planet Roshar’s Bondsmith like Kaladin becomes Wind’s Bondsmith and Rock and Venli become Stone’s Bondsmiths. IOW, Dalinar will be able to wield all 16 of Roshar’s Investitures without regard to Intent. Here’s my question: What else could the bolded phrase mean? I don’t think it refers to the “really, sincerely dead” Adonalsium, nor to the God Beyond. Cultivation and Odium are Roshar’s only other Shards, and they’re both taken. What is “beyond Honor” on Roshar if not the entity Roshar itself? I’m open to suggestions. It is the God Beyond. Dalinar now believes in him. RoW ch 10: Quote “You won’t be the first celebrated soldier who has moved to a support position after seeing one too many friends die,” Dalinar said to Kaladin. “God Beyond willing, we’ll persuade the honorspren to work with us—and then we’ll need to train flocks of new Windrunners. You’ll be of great use overseeing Radiant training either way.” RoW ch 15: Quote Kaladin inched carefully forward, his Blade held before him. “I don’t know what I believe. Navani still follows the Almighty. She burns glyphwards every morning. Dalinar says that the Almighty is dead, but he also claims there’s another true God somewhere in a place beyond Shadesmar. Jasnah says that a being having vast powers doesn’t make them God, and concludes—from the way the world works—that an omnipotent, loving deity cannot exist.” RoW ch 111: Quote Whatever was happening at Urithiru, Kaladin would face it standing up straight. God Beyond bless it to be enough, and that the Windrunner could reach Navani. For now, Dalinar had to focus on his current task. Spoiler Trae The term "the God Beyond" is used across several worlds and stories set in the cosmere. Is this piece of terminology one that has spread across the cosmere through the intermingling of worldhoppers and native populations? And if not, is it merely a conceit that the translation into English we read encapsulates similar convergent ideas? Brandon Sanderson What an excellent question. I have been expecting that question for a while. So... various people are using this phrase, "The God Beyond." And, what Trae is asking is, "Is that a translation artifact?" ...Like, our conceit is, when you are reading a book from the cosmere, I (or someone) has translated it into English. So when you see someone make a pun, it doesn't necessarily mean they made that exact pun, it means they made a pun in their language that worked, and I am looking for one in English that expresses the same concept or the same humor. Or lack thereof, if you don't like puns. In our language. So, you're asking, the God Beyond: do they all say "the God Beyond"? Or the saying some entity that I am translating all as God Beyond. And they are actually all saying "God Beyond." It is the same, in their language, same thing. So, like Worldsinger, Worldbringer, things like this; the linguistic ties there are intentional, as opposed to just an artifact of the translation. There are things that are artifacts of translation very commonly, but that is not one. I am doing that intentionally. JordanCon 2018 (April 21, 2018) 4
AquaRegia he/him Posted November 18, 2024 Posted November 18, 2024 (edited) @Confused, a most excellent and thought-provoking post #500! Thanks for sharing. Alas, your literary and philosophical bona fides are FAR beyond me; I'm woefully underqualified to express opinions about much of what you've said. I share your deep appreciation of Brandon's... Intent, shall we say - the very careful way he crafts both the structure of the novels and the stories themselves, so that as more is revealed, we realize we had clues lying unnoticed before us the whole time. No other novels have given me that delicious feeling of "Oh, so THAT'S what that was about!" as often or as satisfyingly as Brandon's Cosmere works have. 12 hours ago, Confused said: I now suggest Mraize is a kandra. It's certainly possible. In fact, it's possible we've never even seen the real Mraize, he may have been a kandra the whole entire time. The fact that Iyatil thinks something has changed is bound to be important, and clearly something is going on since not one but TWO aviar seem to have disappeared. 2 hours ago, alder24 said: 12 hours ago, Confused said: What is “beyond Honor” on Roshar if not the entity Roshar itself? I’m open to suggestions. It is the God Beyond. Dalinar now believes in him. RoW ch 10: Again, possible... but I'm not buying it, at least, not yet. I'm also not learned in the ways and lore of WoBs, but I know Brandon has said that the existence of "The Beyond" and of "God Beyond" will never be canonically confirmed (or refuted). Some in-world characters believe, some don't, and that's all we can ever hope to get. My spheres here are on The Wind, The Stone, and The Night - Dalinar is feeling something from one (or a combination) of Roshar's OLD gods. Roshar itself? Could be. But... many have speculated on the role of Dawnshards in TSA; we know there is at least one on Roshar, so that might be it. Also, we know Autonomy is expanding her attention toward Scadrial... perhaps her influence is reaching Roshar as well. It might even be Harmony, or another Shard. I decline to speculate further, because Brandon has shown me enough times already that he is well-capable of blasting so far past ALL my expectations that I never even had a chance. Which brings me to another point. Here, in the presence of these illustrious 17th Shard deep thinkers, I'll ask the question that has vexed me for years: is there any possible way we can unmake the current usage of the word "theory" around here? As a scientist, it pains me to see that word used (and often abused) the way it is. I have seen a very few ideas - big, inclusive and predictive ideas, well supported by numerous pieces of textual evidence - that meet the bar to be described, in the literary sense, as a theory. Most of what folks post, though, are simply guesses. Some might charitably be called hypotheses. Given that we are not applying our ideas to understanding the natural world, but rather a work of fiction, experimentation is out (with the exception of asking direct questions and eliciting WoBs of course). I know it's a lot to ask, but I'd love to see the word THEORY given a bit more of the respect it deserves. Edited November 18, 2024 by AquaRegia grrr typos 3
+Oltux72 he/him Posted November 18, 2024 Posted November 18, 2024 12 hours ago, Confused said: For The Stormlight Archives he tries a different tack. “I decided that I would not write The Way of Kings as a postmodern epic. (Not intentionally, at least.)” And yet, in deconstructing Brandon, I think that’s exactly what he does; he writes a postmodern epic that will endure on the bookshelf next to Tolkien’s modern classic. This post tries to show how the postmodern sensibility permeates SLA. Despite his personal aesthetic hopes, I believe Brandon falls subject to Eliot’s dictum in the epigraph: “The great poet in writing himself writes his time,” in this case the time of postmodernism. Now, that I think about the Stormlight Archive I find myself confused, as I see two possibilities I cannot tell apart. It is the very thing Brandon called too hard. If you start with The Way of Kings you could think that the series is about preventing the return of the voidbringers and you'd have a classic hero story with Kaladin and Shallan as the protagonists and Dalinar as the mentor figure. That would make it a story about saving the world, only that the end of Words of Radiance is the plot twist that Brandon called too hard to pull off. That would explain why some readers feel let down by Oathbringer. It is something far older and darker from classical antiquity. It may turn out to be an outright tragedy. Jasnah Kholin is Cassandra. Nobody listened to her warnings and now the world will end with Odium released. 13 hours ago, Confused said: The Shard Cultivation, for example, reflects a modern sensibility, a confidence in systems that can solve large problems. Taravangian reflects more of a postmodern sensibility: “Let me do it. I know what’s best to get things done.” It’s not so much his personal self-confidence as his unwillingness to rely on proven solutions. I am afraid I cannot follow the logic here. Taravangian's original plan involved his own death by execution as a traitor. He is relying on an ancient, proven solution. He is ready to sacrifice a lot just to be sure that some be saved. That is not a new approach. In fact it is a form of utilitarianism. 1
Confused Posted November 20, 2024 Author Posted November 20, 2024 (edited) Thank you all for your kind comments. I appreciate that you appreciate my unusual post. I said the Vessels “kill their Creator because they want access to more magic.” @Oltux72 and @alder24 both point out not all the Vessels were motivated by greed: Quote “A diverse group,” she said. “With equally diverse motives. Some wished for the power; others saw killing Adonalsium as the only good option left to them." Mistborn: Secret History, Chapter Three-2. I did not intend my comment to address the Vessel’s motivations. I see now that the word “because” can be interpreted that way. Point taken. I simply meant that killing Adonalsium for whatever “diverse motives” resulted in the Vessels gaining “access to more magic.” They all wanted that power even if their motives were altruistic. It’s part of my general theory that entropy trends the cosmere towards magical democratization: One to sixteen to many to MANY. From magically Invested beings to magical technology. On 11/18/2024 at 4:00 AM, Oltux72 said: Whatever gave the Singers the forms of power. It looks like the Cosmere's deities did not just contains Adonalsium prior to the Shattering, but also lesser entities like the Aethers and entities like the Wind. It’s established (I think?) that Adonalsium created the cosmere and entities like Stone and Wind. Ado specifically created Stone and Wind’s planet, Roshar, after he created the cosmere. There’s a suggestion in TLM the Aethers might predate Ado. They do predate the Shattering. I think if Aethers predate the cosmere they must have drifted a VERY long way. The cosmere is an isolated thermodynamic system. Maybe Aethers came with the Investiture cloud that became the cosmere? Then remained separate when that Investiture became Adonalsium? The God Beyond... Talk about postmodernism! I chose not to address “TGB” in the OP because Brandon leaves it up to us (and the in-world characters) to decide whether TGB exists and what its cosmere role, if any, might be. Non-systemic. I don’t think characters’ prayers and imprecations to TGB, therefore, are meaningful. Many earthly non-believers make such statements. “There are no atheists in foxholes.” Another example: Spoiler Some of you may know the story of Blaise Pascal, a 17th century French mathematician/philosopher who was a “lifelong” atheist. (He was only 39 when he died.) He invented modern probability theory when he realized the “probable” consequences of atheism. Though Pascal felt the likelihood of God’s existence very small, if he were wrong the consequences were very great – eternal damnation. He became a fervent Catholic. Likelihood times a result gives you the “Expected Value” of that result. Today, securities analysts, decision theorists, business valuation firms, etc. all rely on Pascal’s concept of Expected Value. The most meaningful of your TGB quotes IMO is in RoW Chap. 15: Dalinar “claims there’s another true God somewhere in a place beyond Shadesmar. [Bold added.]” Dalinar accepts “the Almighty” is dead. I first point out the obvious: Dalinar only claims a true God beyond Shadesmar, not beyond the cosmere. This passage may not even refer to TGB. Other possible interpretations that don’t implicate TGB: Tanavast, known as the Almighty, was the MIND that directed Honor’s power. That mind relates to Shadesmar. Tanavast is dead. Most of Honor’s power is in the Spiritual Realm – “another true God...beyond Shadesmar.” Dalinar heads there now to assume that power and become God. I believe this the best reading of this passage, that God exists in the Spiritual Realm. There are many “true Gods” beyond Shadesmar, namely each of the Shards. Adonalsium was the “true God” beyond Shadesmar, since he was everywhere. IIRC, Dalinar has yet to invoke him, though Shalash has. Maybe you’re right that Dalinar refers to TGB. Many people throughout the cosmere do invoke him one way or another. But I think Dalinar means something else. Here’s the WaT quote again: Quote I feel that something has been guiding me all this time. Something I can’t explain, something beyond Honor. Knowledge of TGB is not the same as “something...guiding me all this time.” Guidance implies a subtle pressure nudging Dalinar down a particular path. We have zero evidence TGB maintains any influence in the cosmere. Note also that the RoW quote refers to a ‘’true God” other than the Almighty. The WaT quote specifically refers to Honor, which Dalinar now knows resides mostly in the Spiritual Realm. On 11/18/2024 at 9:13 AM, AquaRegia said: Here, in the presence of these illustrious 17th Shard deep thinkers, I'll ask the question that has vexed me for years: is there any possible way we can unmake the current usage of the word "theory" around here? As a scientist, it pains me to see that word used (and often abused) the way it is. I have seen a very few ideas - big, inclusive and predictive ideas, well supported by numerous pieces of textual evidence - that meet the bar to be described, in the literary sense, as a theory. Most of what folks post, though, are simply guesses. Some might charitably be called hypotheses. Given that we are not applying our ideas to understanding the natural world, but rather a work of fiction, experimentation is out (with the exception of asking direct questions and eliciting WoBs of course). I know it's a lot to ask, but I'd love to see the word THEORY given a bit more of the respect it deserves. Thanks, @AquaRegia! I SO agree with this. In my 2019 post “A Comprehensive Magic Theory,” I say, On 9/18/2019 at 9:55 PM, Confused said: My goal is to show how cosmere magic fits together. No theory is perfect and there will be jagged edges here and there. Theory has text and WoB support. Speculation expands on and logically flows from theory but lacks specific support. [Bold added.] I don’t know if this makes you feel any better, but I identify each of that post’s many sections as either “Theory” or “Speculation.” Our “theories” can’t rely on the scientific method and experimental replicability like scientific theories do. Text and WoB support is all we have to work with; and Brandon’s deliberately cagey. I’ve made this point many times: Brandon is a mystery writer masquerading as a Sci-Fi/Fantasy writer. He loves creating little problems for his fans to solve and laces his writing with clues that foreshadow future events. His WoBs often mislead as much as they illuminate. But some evidence is better than none, and we’re all proud of a “theory” that correctly predicts a future event or fact. (I’ve been very humble lately...) On 11/18/2024 at 10:26 AM, Oltux72 said: I am afraid I cannot follow the logic here. Taravangian's original plan involved his own death by execution as a traitor. He is relying on an ancient, proven solution. He is ready to sacrifice a lot just to be sure that some be saved. That is not a new approach. In fact it is a form of utilitarianism. I refer specifically to the conversation between Cultivation and TOdium in a WaT chapter. TOdium wants to end cosmere suffering his way after he becomes the “one god.” Postmodernism opposes all-encompassing systems designed to solve large problems. Taravangian’s death doesn’t qualify as a large problem (except maybe to him and Dalinar), nor is individual self-sacrifice systemic. You are correct, therefore, that your quoted example is not postmodern. However, the inclusion of many different philosophic ideas like Dalinar and Taravangian discuss is postmodern. Thanks again, folks, for your responses. C. Edited November 20, 2024 by Confused 2
+Oltux72 he/him Posted November 20, 2024 Posted November 20, 2024 5 hours ago, Confused said: I refer specifically to the conversation between Cultivation and TOdium in a WaT chapter. TOdium wants to end cosmere suffering his way after he becomes the “one god.” Postmodernism opposes all-encompassing systems designed to solve large problems. Taravangian’s death doesn’t qualify as a large problem (except maybe to him and Dalinar), nor is individual self-sacrifice systemic. You are correct, therefore, that your quoted example is not postmodern. However, the inclusion of many different philosophic ideas like Dalinar and Taravangian discuss is postmodern. Maybe this is a systematic problem, but I am afraid I cannot follow you. The original issue Taravangian was thinking - erroneously, but inevitably so - he was facing was survival of the species. His solution was to make a deal with the enemy. Concerning the latter conversation, things are different. Taravangian first deduced, correctly - I think we agree on that, that a system of multiple Shards, whose Intents must conflict, is working badly. Sazed and Leras came to the same conclusion. The second idea that reducing the number of Shards to one would fix that issue is quite elemental. You could obviously argue that reducing the number of Shards to zero would also do the job. However that would be quasi-suicidal for Taravangian. Do we really need to resort to ideology to explain that people are not suicidal? Nevertheless the position Taravangian is taking closely resembles enlightened absolutism. I might add that the Cosmere is different in key regards. If you reduce the number of Shards to one, you thereby determine the broad strokes of the system you are going to build. It must conform to the surviving Shard's Intent. In that sense, if you want postmodernism in the Cosmere, you must either get rid of all Shards or reassemble Adonalsium.
Recommended Posts