Shallan's random sketch... OR IS IT?!?!

[Meg]

Moving back the the thread discussion about the scene Shallan drew, I first read it and thought the scene was the assassination we witness when the Half Shards were used against Szeth. Seems that it could be her fathers death and I like that theory, but there a other options too.

I have to ask for my understanding, please apologize: "the scene Shallan drew"? You mean the reading and what Shallan tells there?

If yes I'm sorry that I can't follow your thought: Shallans memories in "Red Carpet, Once White" apparently are from her youth. And a second point: I'm strongly sure that the assassination of Jah Keved's king happened while Shallan stayed in Kharbranth. It's impossible for her to be a witness of this event.*

*As a side note: I'm sure Szeth's Interludes fit in the timeline of TWoK.

[WeiryWriter]

I have to ask for my understanding, please apologize: "the scene Shallan drew"? You mean the reading and what Shallan tells there?

If yes I'm sorry that I can't follow your thought: Shallans memories in "Red Carpet, Once White" apparently are from her youth. And a second point: I'm strongly sure that the assassination of Jah Keved's king happened while Shallan stayed in Kharbranth. It's impossible for her to be a witness of this event.*

*As a side note: I'm sure Szeth's Interludes fit in the timeline of TWoK.

 

The discussion is not about "Red Carpet, Once White" but rather a drawing Shallan did.  When she is doing all of the drawings of the night Jasnah used soulcasting on the muggers she gets distracted and starts to draw a man, face down, on a carpet with blood pooling beneath him.  I'm of the opinion it depicts her father shortly after death.

[Meg]

Thanks Weiry, I apparently lost track. Now I remember that scene and yes, I'm with you here.

Sorry for confusion.

[Isomere]

Yes, it makes both thematic and logical sense for this scene to be of her father's death. I initially thought she was drawing something she had never personally witnessed and it was a new manifestation of her abilities. Something similar to the death rattles, but in picture form. That still seems possible, but not as likely as her fathers death.

[lonelymagician]

Going back to selling a shardblade...It would be problematic, and not just because it's a priceless artifact, or because it would implicate Shallan in her father's murder. What would you do if you really wanted a shardblade, and a small teenage girl who clearly lacks combat training said she was selling one?

[Arook]

Going back to selling a shardblade...It would be problematic, and not just because it's a priceless artifact, or because it would implicate Shallan in her father's murder. What would you do if you really wanted a shardblade, and a small teenage girl who clearly lacks combat training said she was selling one?

 

Yes clearly not something that is safe to do because how do you stop the person your selling it to from just killing you and take the massive amount of money they had to be paying you for it. Also see how Amaram reacted to the blade and plate.

[EddyRed]

A thought occurs, we have seen shallan soulcast blood already (by accident?). Could it be possible that this is where the blood came from? My memory of the books is a little out of date, so I may be completely off here

[Glaring at the Survivor]

Do we even know she killed her father? I mean, 100% know?

[cem]

Do we even know she killed her father? I mean, 100% know?

Yeah, she tells the cryptics so.

[Meg]

IIRC it has been theorized that Shallan didn't kill her father but assumed responsibility for his death.

It would be interesting to know whether the cryptics have knowledge about somebody's past so they accept the truth because it is the truth -- or do they accept "every hidden truth" one reveals to them. With "every hidden truth" I try to say: everything one strongly believes to be true but it is not necessary to be the objective truth. Is this understandable?

[11thorderknight]

I think the Cryptics would accept anything that someone genuinely feels to be true, regardless of objective criteria. So with regard to Shallan, it's possible that they would accept "I killed my father' even if she didn't physically do it, but only if she did something that, in her mind, directly led to his death and that she truly feels responsible for. If, otoh, she merely assumed blame to, for instance, shield one of her brothers, I don't think that would fly with them. 

[EmagSamurai]

Assuming that Shallan had unknowingly soulcast something to blood when her father died, I think she would have put two and two together after the goblet incident. If she still believes she killed her father, then she either now understands more about how it happened, or it's unrelated to soulcasting.

 

 

 

 

 

Edit: Corrected a typo

Edited November 17, 2013 by EmagSamurai

[Argent]

I don't see how it could be related to Soulcasting at all - her experiences with the goblet are very distinct (the cryptics, Shadesmar, the truth). All those were new to her during her tutelage with Jasnah, so it's safe to rule them out as related to her father's death.

[EmagSamurai]

I don't see how it could be related to Soulcasting at all - her experiences with the goblet are very distinct (the cryptics, Shadesmar, the truth). All those were new to her during her tutelage with Jasnah, so it's safe to rule them out as related to her father's death.

 

I agree, completely. 

Edit: I should clarify a bit. My point was that if Shallan had previously attributed her interaction with Shadesmar as some sort of stress induced hallucination, her subsequent interaction would have clarified what had happened, and she would then know the truth about the blood present at her father's death. 

 

That said, I don't think the blood present at her father's death was the result of an accidental soulcasting.

Edited November 17, 2013 by EmagSamurai

[Gloom]

I agree with Argent as well.

 

On the subject of truths, I believe that the Cryptics are aware of truth on a higher level than just what the speaker believes. They even have a means of measuring those truths to some degree. The truth Shallan spoke initially was useless, but the second truth she spoke was powerful. Both were true as far as Shallan was concerned, and while the second truth was more personal, and therefore of greater value to the Cryptics, I think it may have been accepted as long as Shallan felt responsible, but it was powerful because she knew she was responsible.

[marianmi]

Maybe the truth is used by the cryptics in a way as absurd as Wyndle gardening...

[Shardlet]

A thought occurs, we have seen shallan soulcast blood already (by accident?). Could it be possible that this is where the blood came from? My memory of the books is a little out of date, so I may be completely off here

 

Seems pretty unlikely to me.  Her trip to Shadesmar seems to have been a memorable occasion for her, as one would expect.  And, i doubt that she could have soulcast (at least at first) without going to Shadesmar.  Also there is no indication of any kind of familiarity as would be expected if a previous trip was assumed to be a hallucination.

Edited November 18, 2013 by Shardlet

[The Count]

On the subject of truths, I believe that the Cryptics are aware of truth on a higher level than just what the speaker believes. They even have a means of measuring those truths to some degree.

 

Not sure I agree with this simply because truth by its very nature is wholly subjective and dependent on the belief of the observer.

 

Being a murderer is how Shallan sees herself, but given what we know of her character, I double that the act of killing her father as as clean cut as that statement would imply.

 

For example, if someone were killing her Father and she witheld some aid that would have saved him she could still believe that she killed him.

 

Or, if she hit her father over the head wirth a vase to stop him beating her brother to death and he died because of that. 

Is that murder? Shallan could certainly see herself as one and so her statement can be true from her persepctive even though others might not agree.

 

Also, a large theme of Shallan's tutalage with Jasnah is about the lack of any absolute.

 

Look at Jasnahs killing of the three thugs... I doubt Jasnah sees herself as a murderer, even though she deliberately sought out an killed them. Indeed the whole nature fo Shallan's study is about the abiguity surrounding the nature of the act. 

Edited November 18, 2013 by MadRand

[Truthseeker]

Not sure I agree with this simply because truth by its very nature is wholly subjective and dependent on the belief of the observer.

 

 

What if when their told a truth they witness the actual event as it unfolded and judge what they are told through their own observations, for example they could have seen the events of Shallans fathers death as she saw it through her eyes but without the emotions of personal involvement or details missed at the time through shock, haste or a number of other things.

[The Count]

 

What if when their told a truth they witness the actual event as it unfolded and judge what they are told through their own observations, for example they could have seen the events of Shallans fathers death as she saw it through her eyes but without the emotions of personal involvement or details missed at the time through shock, haste or a number of other things.

 

 

I suppose such  thing could be possible... but if the view it though Shallans memories of the incident, they are hardly getting an unbiased viewpoint since her memories will automatically be coloured by her emotional turmoil.

 

I think I will evoke occam's razor on this one.

 

That the cryptics most likely judge the truth as the one they are bonding with sees it. That is, how true they are to themselves.

Edited November 18, 2013 by MadRand

[Truthseeker]

I suppose such  thing could be possible... but if the view it though Shallans memories of the incident, they are hardly getting an unbiased viewpoint since her memories will automatically be coloured by her emotional turmoil.

 

Was thinking more along the lines of them seeing visions of the past kinda like a seer sees visions of the future, they see what she saw but without her emotions.

 

That the cryptics most likely judge the truth as the one they are bonding with sees it. That is, how true they are to themselves.

 

I agree this is most likely I just wanted to point out the possibility that they may see the truth uncoloured by the belief of the observer.

[Reader of Books]

Going back to the issue of who is depicted in Shallan's sketch, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Isomere's suggestion that it's the king of Jah Keved whom Szeth assassinates. I had previously concluded, as most people in this thread seem to have, that the scene Shallan draws is depicting her father's death, but my friend is reading WoK for the first time and he mentioned the sketch to me and my mind jumped immediately to Szeth and the king before I thought about Shallan's father. Then he mentioned that in the next Shallan chapter she hears a voice (presumably the cryptics) ask her:

 

What are you? (Way of Kings Chapter 42)

These are also the king's last words, directed at Szeth, before being killed, which adds another link to that scene. It's worth noting, though, that the cryptics ask Shallan this again in Chapter 45 right before she soulcasts the goblet, so it is entirely possible that this is unconnected to the assassination. It does seem like something of a coincidence though that Shallan mysteriously draws a dead brightlord in a dining hall and then next chapter she just so happens to hear the dying words of a king assassinated in a dining hall...and I've come not to trust seemingly innocuous coincidences in Brandon's work to actually be coincidences. 

 

Shallan's sketch is described as follows:

 

...a lavish room with a thick, ornamented rug, swords on the walls. A long dining table, set with a half eaten meal. And a dead man in fine clothing, laying face-first on the floor, blood pooling around him.

While it's possible that this is describing Shallan's father and her home, I find that's a strangely aloof description if it is. I would think there would be some element of recognition that the room is from where she grew up or that the corpse is her father. I know Brandon had Kelsier hold back important info in his POV's but I've heard Brandon say multiple times on Writing Excuses that he felt this was cheating and he only did it because it was essential to the story, and even still he still would generally at least signal that Kelsier had a secret he was refusing to think about. He does this elsewhere with Shallan, but I don't see it here which seems odd if this is a depiction of her father's murder, particular because hiding that the scene was about her father's murder is hardly essential to the story.

 

It does sound to me, though, like it could be describing the scene where Szeth kills the king. He interrupts a feast, so there would be a half eaten meal on a long table, and the description of the swords on the wall reminds me of a great hall in a castle where a feast like that would take place. This could also explain the blood (I had always assumed Shallan killed her father with her shardblade, so the blood seems weird to me if it is her father. I don't remember the quote that made me think this though). Szeth slams into the king and breaks his arm before finishing him with the shard blade. If that was a compound fracture his arm could have bled heavily before he died.

 

I do agree that there is no way that Shallan could have witnessed the assassination actually take place. In fact I doubt it's happened yet. IIRC, with the exception of Elantris and WoT, Brandon has said his books are strictly chronological, and the assassination comes after the sketch and her hearing the voice.

 

This is precisely what I find so interesting about this possibility though. We know some degree of future-sight is possible in the Cosmere because Hoid does this (admittedly with feruchemy, but its possiible the same affected could be achieved with different magic systems and this is proof that future-sight doesn't violate the laws of the Cosmere). I can only wonder if Shallan's connection to the cryptics is making her manifest some sort of prophetic capability. I admittedly don't know as much as I probably should about how the magic systems on Roshar work, but presuming Shallan is a lightweaver and her surges are illumination and transformation I don't know that predictive ability would fit into either of these...perhaps illumination if taken figuratively, but I would be inclined to take it in the literal, light manipulation sense. If this is actually a picture of the assasination, then, it could have interesting implications for how the magic system works on Roshar because it would suggest you can manifest abilities though a spren bond beyond those covered in the surges.

 

I'm still far from certain that the sketch is actually of the dead king (Shallan's father or some other random dude are definitely possibilities), but I think there is at least enough evidence to make this worth considering, if only because its implications would be really cool.

[Scott]

The scene Shallan draws does not match the scene where Szeth kills the king of Jah Kaved.

 

From the part where Szeth kills the king:

 

 

Szeth reached the doorway, men with burning eyes falling to the ground behind him. Just outside, the king ran amid a final small group of guards. He turned and cried out as he saw Szeth, then threw up his halfshard shield.

Szeth wove through the guards, then hit the shield twice, shattering it and forcing the king backward.

The man tripped, dropping his Blade. It puffed away to mist.

Szeth leaped up and Lashed himself downward with a double Basic Lashing. He hit atop the king, his increased weight breaking an arm and pinning the man to the ground. Szeth swept his blade through the surprised soldiers, who fell as their legs died beneath them.

Finally, Szeth raised his Blade over his head, looking down at the king.

“What are you?” the man whispered, eyes watering with pain.

“Death,” Szeth said, then drove his Blade point-first through the man’s face and into the rock below.

 

1)  The king flees the feast room.  He's killed outside the doorway in the hall.

2)  He's surrounded by dead guards, and a shattered halfshard shield.

3)  The only wound the King receives is from the Shardblade.

 

From Shallan's sketch:

 

Shallan froze, realizing for the first time what she’d been drawing. Not another scene from the alleyway,

but a lavish room with a thick, ornamented rug and swords on the walls. A long dining table, set with a halfeaten

meal.

And a dead man in fine clothing, lying face-first on the floor, blood pooling around him.

 

1)  The body is in the room.

2)  His is the only body in the sketch.

3)  Blood is pooling around him.  Pooling blood only happens when the body is freshly dead, and when it has a physical wound. 

 

None of these points match.

 

In addition, I think there's a rock-solid refutation of this that no-one has considered yet. BS has said he writes his scenes in chronological order, ignoring preludes and prologues.  Shallan draws the scene in chapter 39.  Szeth kills the King in the interludes between chapters 51 and 52. This means that Shallan would have had to draw the scene before it happens.  

[Reader of Books]

The fact that the assassination takes place in the future relative to when the sketch is drawn is why I find the concept of the sketch depicting the attack so fascinating. The cryptics presumably must have some way of verifying/sensing truths, I'm wondering if that includes the potential to sense powerful future truths, i.e. "The king of Jah Keved will be assassinated at a banquet." We know from Hoid's ability to know when he needs to be as he jumps through time that some degree of future-sight is possible in the Cosmere, so seeing into the future in this way doesn't violate the laws of the Cosmere on a fundamental level, though its certainly possible that the cryptics simply can't do it. If they can, though, Shallan might be able to channel their knowledge and thus produce a sketch about a future event.

 

That in turn could explain why the details are off somewhat...looking into the future may very well be an imprecise business or, alternatively, the cryptics may not be particularly interested in the accuracy of the minutiae, just the underlying truth. Admittedly there is a lot to take on faith here and I don't know that I quite believe it myself at this point (I began the post before I noticed that the cryptics repeated the question, "what are you?" when Shallan soulcasts the cup, which weakens the connection to the assassination). I still think its worth considering, though, as an alternative to the theory that the sketch is depicting Shallan's father's murder because her reaction and description just doesn't feel right to me if it is her father. 

 

When seeing the sketch she:

 

Jumped back, tossing aside the charcoal, then crumpled up the paper. Shaking, she moved over and sat down on the bed among the pictures. Dropping the crumpled drawing, she raised her fingers to her forehead, feeling the cold sweat there. Something was wrong with her, with her drawings. She had to get out. Escape the death, the philosophy and the questions. She stood an hurriedly strode into the main room of Jasnah's quarters."

 

Its true that she reacts violently, but she also reacts pretty dramatically (and understandably so) when the cryptics appear in her sketches, so that alone doesn't indicate she's viewing a traumatic scene from her past. Moreover, nowhere in this description is any sense of 

 

1) guilt - she generally seems to feel this when thinking of her father's death

2)recognition - there is no hint that she has seen the room or the dead man before

3)flashback or repressed memories -  often when thinking of the events surrounding her father's death she hints at buried memories

 

Also, the fact that she doesn't seem to understand whats happening to her or her sketches would be odd if it is a picture of her father's death. She had just spent a great deal of time reliving and evaluating the morality of Jasnah's killings, so it would seem natural for her mind to turn to her own murder when left to wander. While having unconsciously sketched her dead father may be disturbing to Shallan, I doubt it would produce the same confused/weirded out vibe she gets. 

[Cortez]

I don't think that this sketch is a memory of her Father's death, nor do I think it is of Szeths assassination of the King of Jah Keved.

 

First the scene she draws is different to the memory we have in chapter 7;

 

Memories attacked her. Nan Balat bruised, his coat torn. A long, silvery sword in her hand, sharp enough to cut stones as if they were water.

There is no Nan Balat in the drawing, just a single man in a pool of blood. This also for me rules out the assassination of the King as Szeth describes it as a slaughter. There should be other corpses a signs of battle if this drawing depicts that event.

 

The room described also sounds a bit too opulent to be Shallan's family home. I've never got the impression that the family is particularly well off although this is mostly speculation. In addition the "camera" angle of the drawing seems wrong to me. If this a memory of the moments immediately following her murder of her father then she would be standing over the corpse looking down at it and not viewing the scene from the other side of the room, which is where she would have to be in order to get the table and wall decorations into the picture.

 

The other issue with  it being a memory of the murder is in her reaction. Any other time she comes close to thinking about the murder she immediately rejects it telling herself not to think of it "Don't think of the past" and similar responses. In this scene she says that there is something wrong with her, with her drawings. This to me implies that what she drew was something she had never seen before.

 

I also still think that Shallan's father was killed with a shardblade, which obviously would not leave behind a pool of blood. The reason I think this is because the soulcaster is described as being sheared across one of the gem settings (sorry I don't seem to be able to find the relevant quotes) which sounds to me like it was cut with a shardblade. I've seen the suggestion that the soulcaster was cut be accident after the death but this does not fit with some of the other facts regarding where the soulcaster was found. The soulcaster was described by Shallan (on two separate occasion I think) as being found on him after he was dead and also that it was found in his jacket pocket. It sounds to me like it would be very difficult to cut the soulcaster with a shardblade without killing the person wearing the jacket.