Atium in Feruchemy

[67-Pagerunner]

We all know that in Mistborn Atium shows the future in Allomancy. But does anyone know what it does in Feruchemy? If not what do you think it would store.

P.S. Keep in mind, Chromium already stores fortune

[Frustration]

Atium stores Youth, that's how TLR and Marsh stay alive despite being centuries old

[redundant]

With the Allomantic atium retcon, I wonder whether that's pure atium TLR and Marsh are using or the electrum alloy.

[Frustration]

3 minutes ago, redundant said:

With the Allomantic atium retcon, I wonder whether that's pure atium TLR and Marsh are using or the electrum alloy.

It's not a retcon, it's been like that since before HoA

Spoiler

Aranfan

I thought we had reached a consensus that the atium we see the characters use was the electrum alloy form?

Peter Ahlstrom

I thought myself so clever for coming up with this theory.

At this point I am in a position where I could confirm it or deny it.

However, my position also means that I must do no such thing.

Mwa ha ha ha ha.

Footnote: Peter has since confirmed that this is the case.
TWG Posts (Nov. 15, 2009)

Sorry, that's just a pet peeve of mine.

 

Personally, I believe it to be the alloyed form, as Marsh's bag that he got from HoA is what he was using to compound until HoA.

[Oranjejuicemonki He/Him]

For allomantic purposes the impure atium isn't any different except not everyone can use it no?

Do we know if everyone could use pure atium feruchemically or is it different?

[Frustration]

13 minutes ago, Oranjejuicemonki said:

For allomantic purposes the impure atium isn't any different except not everyone can use it no?

We have no idea what it does.

13 minutes ago, Oranjejuicemonki said:

Do we know if everyone could use pure atium feruchemically or is it different?

That one is also up in the air

[Trusk'our he/him]

46 minutes ago, Frustration said:

 

Personally, I believe it to be the alloyed form, as Marsh's bag that he got from HoA is what he was using to compound until HoA.

It is the alloyed form. Harmony's servants tweak it before giving it to him.

Spoiler

https://wob.coppermind.net/events/509-youtube-spoiler-stream-5/#e15969

LewsTherinTelescope

At the end of The Lost Metal, we learn that Marsh will be using atium from the ettmetal experiments to stay alive going forward. However, Peter recently revealed (and you confirmed) that the atium in Era 1 which stored youth was actually a mix of atium and electrum. How will this continue to work to keep him young?

Brandon Sanderson

They're going to have a different term for pure atium and for what has been known as atium--what they're making. It is not hard to get the right mix down for what he needs to stay alive. It is hard to make enough of it to keep him alive. Well, not hard, but definitely not scalable to more than one person, how about that. They are able to do it, you've just got to make an alloy.

I will apologize for this. This is a post-Era-1 retcon where I realized I need all the God Metals to do different things, and this is just one of the aspects that comes down. For those who don't know what's going on: I get done with Era 1, I start really working on the nature of metals in the cosmere. I'm like, "Ehhh... Atium really should be burnable by anybody. It's a God Metal. The way God Metals work is not in line with how I've made atium. So what they call atium has to have trace elements of something else, and then there's a pure form of atium out there that would be the true pure God Metal." That is one of those unfortunate retcons when you're doing all this continuity. And it works just fine in the books, because the way that atium is being made is a pretty complicated little process there in the Pits of Hathsin.

The question is the right question. Sazed is going to get out of this pure atium, which he is going to need to tweak before he gives it to Marsh. Whether Marsh knows he is getting a tweaked version or not is subject to your own interpretation.

For arcanist purposes, if you want to call the other one pure atium and the regular one just atium, I'd recommend something like that for your wikis and things like that.

 

[Through the Living Hopper He/Him]

1 hour ago, Frustration said:

We have no idea what it does.

Duralumin+ Hathsinium

There's a WoB somewhere.

Edit:

Spoiler

Quote

AAKS

My understanding is that Brandon thinks it is a plothole that lerasium can be burned by Scadrian (regardless of if they are Mistings/Mistborn) but atium can't.

His solution is to retcon the Pits to naturally produce an atium/electrum alloy, presumably by the design of Preservation. Therefore we don't know what pure atium looks like or does when used in any magic.

Peter Ahlstrom

We do know what it does. It’s on the Allomancy poster, and the effect appeared one time at the end of Hero of Ages.

LewsTherinTelescope

Interesting. Do you know if he had already conceived the retcon by the time the poster was written, or if that line about pure atium just turned out to fit really well retroactively?

Peter Ahlstrom

The retcon is way older than a lot of people assume.

LewsTherinTelescope

Does this mean he had it in mind by the time Hero of Ages released (since the first public version of the poster dates to 2008), or just that it's old but not sure exactly how old?

Peter Ahlstrom

Remember that what's in the books is filtered through the understanding of the characters. So even if Brandon planned it from the beginning, if the characters didn't know about it, it's not going to come out in the book.

And see this thread reply from 2009.

Footnote: The link is to a post on the Timewaster's Guide forums, where Peter responds to someone asking about whether atium is an alloy by saying he now knows enough to confirm or deny the theory, but is not allowed to.

https://wob.coppermind.net/events/486/#e15955

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

@Frustration It talks about the retcon too.

Edited February 17 by ThatOneWorldhopper

[Frustration]

16 minutes ago, ThatOneWorldhopper said:

Duralumin+ Hathsinium

There's a WoB somewhere.

Edit:

  Hide contents

 

@Frustration It talks about the retcon too.

I'm aware of that WoB, if you click on the link to the post Peter is talking about it will take you to the WoB I posted earlier.

In addition Peter himself does not consider it a retcon, he just uses that term because that's what the fans say, even if it's wrong

Spoiler

Peter Ahlstrom

I do get annoyed a bit with the "atium retcon" terminology though. In that case, I consider it to always have been that way; at the very latest that was decided before the release of Hero of Ages. The characters just had it wrong all along—which is something that constantly happens in these books; new information comes along that changes the characters' understanding. Nothing needs to change in the text of Era 1 to accommodate the "atium retcon" because it's completely compatible with what was written; the characters were just wrong. 

Miscellaneous 2024 (Nov. 18, 2024)

 

[ParaTulip fae/faer (declines as she/her)]

This has turned into a bit of a discourse around the nature of retro active continuity, I so I hope no one minds me sharing my ideas on that:

To me, the essential thing to see is that Mistborn has been big on retcons since at least Secret History, and anything about Atium is a smaller change. Sure, there was nothing to demonstrate that Kelsier was not a helpful spirit pushing along the events of HoA, even some scenes that could suggest it, but having him be literally walking around in a parallel dimension for the whole book was a retcon that changed the meaning of his bodily death in key ways.

There is a way to see retro active continuity as having two forms: When a character's backstory is told, that is a retro actively canon event. If it is handled poorly, such backstory can clash with their prior canon actions in a way that produces dissonance in the reader, but it does not contradict the told narrative itself. Then there is the purely dissonant retcon that comic books are famous for: Whoops, there was a time wave and now what you read didn't happen or at least did not happen the way you and others read it at the time. The atium change is a lot closer to the former, while in my opinion Kel being around in Era 2 and stuff is closer to the latter.

As for understanding what refined atium does: The Allomancy chart DOES say "Pure atium grants the Allomancer an expansive vision of the future and enhances the mind's ability to accept, process, and hold information." It seems the Electrum alloy focuses it on the immediate future and gives it the form of the electrum ghosts that overlay with the present, though the characters think of these as atium shadows due to having experienced the alloyed god metal version first. But malatium sees the alternative or past versions of others... so I guess that is more leaning into the enhancing the mind's processing or something.

Okay, now to talk about Feruchemy... wow the Feruchemy chart says practically nothing about Atium or Lerasium. That's nuts. It is weird to think about the relationship between Determination and Youth. If you put a gun to my head I could probably explain it as "The determination to live/ to oppose the force of time." but that feels sketchy so I don't think I am getting out of this one.

[Through the Living Hopper He/Him]

3 hours ago, ParaTulip said:

This has turned into a bit of a discourse around the nature of retro active continuity, I so I hope no one minds me sharing my ideas on that:

To me, the essential thing to see is that Mistborn has been big on retcons since at least Secret History, and anything about Atium is a smaller change. Sure, there was nothing to demonstrate that Kelsier was not a helpful spirit pushing along the events of HoA, even some scenes that could suggest it, but having him be literally walking around in a parallel dimension for the whole book was a retcon that changed the meaning of his bodily death in key ways.

There is a way to see retro active continuity as having two forms: When a character's backstory is told, that is a retro actively canon event. If it is handled poorly, such backstory can clash with their prior canon actions in a way that produces dissonance in the reader, but it does not contradict the told narrative itself. Then there is the purely dissonant retcon that comic books are famous for: Whoops, there was a time wave and now what you read didn't happen or at least did not happen the way you and others read it at the time. The atium change is a lot closer to the former, while in my opinion Kel being around in Era 2 and stuff is closer to the latter.

As for understanding what refined atium does: The Allomancy chart DOES say "Pure atium grants the Allomancer an expansive vision of the future and enhances the mind's ability to accept, process, and hold information." It seems the Electrum alloy focuses it on the immediate future and gives it the form of the electrum ghosts that overlay with the present, though the characters think of these as atium shadows due to having experienced the alloyed god metal version first. But malatium sees the alternative or past versions of others... so I guess that is more leaning into the enhancing the mind's processing or something.

Okay, now to talk about Feruchemy... wow the Feruchemy chart says practically nothing about Atium or Lerasium. That's nuts. It is weird to think about the relationship between Determination and Youth. If you put a gun to my head I could probably explain it as "The determination to live/ to oppose the force of time." but that feels sketchy so I don't think I am getting out of this one.

I don't think the SH thing was a retcon. Brandon must have had it in mind at least before HoA (otherwise her not going to meet Hoid and the Mistborn following her were really weird things he threw in). 

14 hours ago, Frustration said:

I'm aware of that WoB, if you click on the link to the post Peter is talking about it will take you to the WoB I posted earlier.

In addition Peter himself does not consider it a retcon, he just uses that term because that's what the fans say, even if it's wrong

  Reveal hidden contents

Peter Ahlstrom

I do get annoyed a bit with the "atium retcon" terminology though. In that case, I consider it to always have been that way; at the very latest that was decided before the release of Hero of Ages. The characters just had it wrong all along—which is something that constantly happens in these books; new information comes along that changes the characters' understanding. Nothing needs to change in the text of Era 1 to accommodate the "atium retcon" because it's completely compatible with what was written; the characters were just wrong. 

Miscellaneous 2024 (Nov. 18, 2024)

 

I see. You're right.

[ParaTulip fae/faer (declines as she/her)]

1 hour ago, ThatOneWorldhopper said:

I don't think the SH thing was a retcon. Brandon must have had it in mind at least before HoA (otherwise her not going to meet Hoid and the Mistborn following her were really weird things he threw in). 

Mr Sanderson could have everything in his mind from the moment of his birth and that would not change how things were published or how I read them. 

Please reconsider what I wrote. I think you are misunderstanding my point about the nature of retcons. I could use the example of Homestuck or western comic books to try to expound on the topic more, but I fear that is off topic.

[Frustration]

12 minutes ago, ParaTulip said:

Mr Sanderson could have everything in his mind from the moment of his birth and that would not change how things were published or how I read them. 

Please reconsider what I wrote. I think you are misunderstanding my point about the nature of retcons. I could use the example of Homestuck or western comic books to try to expound on the topic more, but I fear that is off topic.

Retcon stands for retroactive continuity, that means a change in the story after the fact, not something that was intended to begin with that was revealed later. Plot twists like Kelsier being alive are not Retcons.

The only actual retcon in the Cosmere I can think of was Szeth's death in WoR. Initially, Kaladin killed him with a shardblade, but it was changed to him falling in later publications.

[ParaTulip fae/faer (declines as she/her)]

55 minutes ago, Frustration said:

Retcon stands for retroactive continuity, that means a change in the story after the fact, not something that was intended to begin with that was revealed later. Plot twists like Kelsier being alive are not Retcons.

I feel like this might become tedious but: "after the fact" what does this mean? After what fact?

Things like Shallan's mom in WaT are retcons even if they are planned from the beginning. This is not me trying to make a value judgement, I am not saying "Secret History bad because retcon" or "Shallan parentage reveal bad because reton".

Supposing that it can only be a retcon if there is a re-issue of the text that changes the actual printed words is something of a retcon but it is not the common sort. Most retcons in fiction are not due to republishing the same story with version differences.

Any time a story does a flashback or a character explains a backstory, that is retroactive continuity. It is information that shapes and re-contextualizes prior narrative. Twist endings and reveals are often retroactive continuity, with the rush of feelings about how the newly reformed canon being why they are emotionally impactful.

[Frustration]

6 minutes ago, ParaTulip said:

I feel like this might become tedious but: "after the fact" what does this mean? After what fact?

Things like Shallan's mom in WaT are retcons even if they are planned from the beginning. This is not me trying to make a value judgement, I am not saying "Secret History bad because retcon" or "Shallan parentage reveal bad because reton".

Supposing that it can only be a retcon if there is a re-issue of the text that changes the actual printed words is something of a retcon but it is not the common sort. Most retcons in fiction are not due to republishing the same story with version differences.

Any time a story does a flashback or a character explains a backstory, that is retroactive continuity. It is information that shapes and re-contextualizes prior narrative. Twist endings and reveals are often retroactive continuity, with the rush of feelings about how the newly reformed canon being why they are emotionally impactful.

That's not retroactive continuity, that's the original continuity explained more deeply. In order for it to be retroactive it has to change the original continuity, not just recontextualize it. If the original text needs no alterations that doesn't count as retroactive.

That's not to say it's a bad thing, I believe several retcons have improved the continuity, just that some of these things are reveals and others are actual retcons.

[ParaTulip fae/faer (declines as she/her)]

4 hours ago, Frustration said:

In order for it to be retroactive it has to change the original continuity, not just recontextualize it. If the original text needs no alterations that doesn't count as retroactive.

If in the first installment of my series I introduce Dave, who goes about being nice to people on his way home, and in the second installment I introduce Dave's freezer full of human body parts of all the people he has killed before the events of chapter 1, I have used the literary tool of retroactive continuity to produce an artistic effect in the reader by forcing them to change how they understand the character.

It does not matter if I intended killer Dave from the jump, the sequence of works is such that the reader went from having one kind of interpretation due to a prior and was guided by a later work to have a different one.

And after this I am done arguing about the definition of a retcon. If someone brings up the point again I am unwatching this thread.

[Schizoposting]

5 hours ago, Frustration said:

That's not retroactive continuity, that's the original continuity explained more deeply. In order for it to be retroactive it has to change the original continuity, not just recontextualize it. If the original text needs no alterations that doesn't count as retroactive.

What counts as "original continuity"? The secret master plan inside the author's head? I know that it's difficult for many people to accept, but authorial intention is irrelevant in literary criticism; all that matters is what's in the text, no more, no less. This does not make all interpretations equally valid; it simply means that the author's interpretation is not inherently superior to all others by virtue of it being the authors. What matters is how well a given interpretation fits the textual evidence, not who made it.

BTW, a retcon is literally defined as: 

Spoiler

a literary device in fictional story telling whereby facts and events established through the narrative are adjusted, ignored, supplemented, or contradicted by a subsequently published work that recontextualizes or breaks continuity with the former.

 

[Frustration]

43 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

What counts as "original continuity"? The secret master plan inside the author's head? I know that it's difficult for many people to accept, but authorial intention is irrelevant in literary criticism;

Literary criticism?

I have to disagree with that term. It makes it sound like this is some sort of overly sophisticated college society rather than a bunch of nerds on the internet.

51 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

What counts as "original continuity"? The secret master plan inside the author's head? I know that it's difficult for many people to accept, but authorial intention is irrelevant in literary criticism; all that matters is what's in the text, no more, no less. This does not make all interpretations equally valid; it simply means that the author's interpretation is not inherently superior to all others by virtue of it being the authors. What matters is how well a given interpretation fits the textual evidence, not who made it.

As for death of the Author which is what you are getting at

1. That's just an opinion with no more backing to it than any other, as happens when we're dealing with something made up like books rather than hard sciences like physics or chemistry.
2. Brandon himself has said that death of the author is incompatible with the cosmere.
3. If you choose to hold such a viewpoint that's fine but I don't think it's fair to hold such a viewpoint as superior, or something that others need to "accept" especially on a fansite where 99% of what we talk about comes from WoBs, which is literally just Brandon's interpretation of the Cosmere.
4. Under such an interpretation there wasn't a retcon anyway as no change appeared in the books and only in Brandon talking about it.

Related information

Spoiler

 

 

55 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

BTW, a retcon is literally defined as: 

  Reveal hidden contents

a literary device in fictional story telling whereby facts and events established through the narrative are adjusted, ignored, supplemented, or contradicted by a subsequently published work that recontextualizes or breaks continuity with the former.

 

By whom?

The term originates from comic fandoms where it was used to refer to new comics contradicting or undoing old ones. Either through alternate universes, time travel, or just changing the canon with no explanation as frequently happens.

Under such a definition as you propose the term not only does not work inside of its origin, but it also loses all identity as if simply recontextualizing counts as a retcon any reference to an event or topic that was already covered in the material would count.

[Schizoposting]

2 hours ago, Frustration said:

Literary criticism?

I have to disagree with that term. It makes it sound like this is some sort of overly sophisticated college society rather than a bunch of nerds on the internet.

I use the word in a purely descriptive sense, to mean the interpretation of literature. In my opinion, all discussion of literature amounts to literary criticism, regardless of whether or not it's formal or casual. 

2 hours ago, Frustration said:

That's just an opinion with no more backing to it than any other, as happens when we're dealing with something made up like books rather than hard sciences like physics or chemistry.

Just because its literary criticism is not a hard science, does not mean that it's subjective. For example, if I were to interpret the SA as saying that all men should be illiterate, then this would be objectively incorrect.

2 hours ago, Frustration said:

Brandon himself has said that death of the author is incompatible with the cosmere.

That's just his interpretation. Remember, just because he's the author doesn't automatically make it superior to others.

2 hours ago, Frustration said:

If you choose to hold such a viewpoint that's fine but I don't think it's fair to hold such a viewpoint as superior, or something that others need to "accept" especially on a fansite where 99% of what we talk about comes from WoBs, which is literally just Brandon's interpretation of the Cosmere.

You can certainly accept his word as gospel, if you wish, but you don't have to. For instance, if Brandon were to (hypothetically) drop a WoB that Ranette is actually straight and not gay, then I would be under no obligation to accept it.

2 hours ago, Frustration said:

The term originates from comic fandoms where it was used to refer to new comics contradicting or undoing old ones. Either through alternate universes, time travel, or just changing the canon with no explanation as frequently happens.

Would it not be a retcon then, if it was part of the author's intent? What if we don't know the author's intent, does that mean that it's impossible to determine whether or not it's a retcon? Just because the word emerged from a specific narrow usage, doesn't mean that it can only be used in that way.

2 hours ago, Frustration said:

Under such a definition as you propose the term not only does not work inside of its origin, but it also loses all identity as if simply recontextualizing counts as a retcon any reference to an event or topic that was already covered in the material would count.

Only if it contradicts our current knowledge of said event or topic.

[Frustration]

13 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

I use the word in a purely descriptive sense, to mean the interpretation of literature. In my opinion, all discussion of literature amounts to literary criticism, regardless of whether or not it's formal or casual. 

I suppose I can understand that.

13 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

Just because its literary criticism is not a hard science, does not mean that it's subjective. For example, if I were to interpret the SA as saying that all men should be illiterate, then this would be objectively incorrect.

Objectively based on what? That the characters don't come to that conclusion? They get things wrong all the time. If you make all interpretations equal that interpretation is valid.

15 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

That's just his interpretation. Remember, just because he's the author doesn't automatically make it superior to others.

Why not?

15 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

You can certainly accept his word as gospel, if you wish, but you don't have to. For instance, if Brandon were to (hypothetically) drop a WoB that Ranette is actually straight and not gay, then I would be under no obligation to accept it.

Well even those of us who accept WoBs wouldn't. In accordance with Brandon canon goes: Books > WoBs.

17 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

Would it not be a retcon then, if it was part of the author's intent?

It would not.

17 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

What if we don't know the author's intent, does that mean that it's impossible to determine whether or not it's a retcon?

Depends on the context. In comics it usually resulted from getting a new writer who was not the original author. In other media as long as the fundamentals of the text didn't need to change, such as The Hobbit being rewritten so that Bilbo finds the ring rather than winning it, then it would be impossible to determine. My mind would say it would be difficult to even make the case for it being a retcon in the first place.

20 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

Only if it contradicts our current knowledge of said event or topic.

In that case there is still no Atium retcon as out knowledge was not contradicted.

[Through the Living Hopper He/Him]

@Frustration@Schizoposting, I'm a bit frustrated by this too, but this is really off-topic, so maybe you should start a new thread,put in these same arguments, and hide them here.