[OB] A heralds sanity

[insert_anagram_here]

3 minutes ago, Rainier said:

So no, Shalash is not a Lightweaver, but I think she's going to become a Releaser, as you said.

Aha that's interesting! Can you give me more details on why you believe this?

[digitalbusker]

1 hour ago, insert_anagram_here said:

Aha that's interesting! Can you give me more details on why you believe this?

We know she's getting a flashback (PoV?) book in the back five. We know each of the orders is supposed to "have" one of the ten books. The only two confirmed book characters who aren't already known to be members of an order are Ash and Taln. The only two orders not represented among the other eight book characters are the Stonewards and the Releasers (aka Dustbringers). Taln still seems like a good match for the order associated with him, but Ash has had some personality changes (notably she's destroying art now instead of creating it), so seems like a plausible match for the Releasers.

Also, at the end of Oathbringer, when Dalinar thinks he's almost got all the orders represented (the "Avengers Assemble" scene) we can confidently map eight of the orders to characters who are present and have bonded spren. The two orders missing, again, are Stonewards and Releasers, and the two characters yet unbonded (as far as we know), again, are Taln and Ash.

Now we don't absolutely know that each book character will be a member of the order that corresponds to their book. But we're pretty sure of eighty percent of them, so....

[Weltall]

2 hours ago, insert_anagram_here said:

I don't know if Hoid and Mraize are the same person, but I kinda think they aren't. I don't see how this is relevant

Why are you so set to dismiss this that you go so far as to come up with something completely ridiculous and compare it. Cannot the same thing be said for a lot of theories going on on the forums? What kind of argument is this dude?

Because the idea that Mraize and Hoid are the same person requires just as much twisting of the text as the idea that Ash and Shalash are not the same person, requires one to ignore the obvious reading of several WoBs and whose plausibility also pretty much boils down to 'it hasn't been absolutely positively disproven, so it could still be true'.

As for what kind of argument this is, it's called an analogy. If you can see why the Hoid=Mraize argument is absurd, you can perhaps see why the Ash=Anyone But Shalash argument is also kind of absurd.

[The One Who Connects]

13 hours ago, insert_anagram_here said:

Also, Ash is said to be one of the 10 SA books POV and if she indeed is Shalash, that would mean we are lacking the Dustbringer order from the books but at the same time have two Lightweavers POVs.

You are equating two things that are not the same. Each book will focus on an Order. Book, not flashback character.

Quote

Questioner

What are the other books in The Stormlight Archive going to be about?

Brandon Sanderson

Well each one is going to cover a flashback sequence for one of the characters and each one will focus on a different order of the Knights Radiant. And that's not always the same, like the flashbacks for the first one were Kaladin and it was also Windrunners, but we won't always have them be the exact same.

We know we will learn about all 10 Orders. We do not have confirmation that our 10 Flashback people will be of those Orders. Eshonai certainly isn't.

13 hours ago, insert_anagram_here said:

The theory that Ash is Shalash is exactly that, a theory and never proved in the books. She destroys Shalash's statues, but that doesn't prove that she is Shalash herself.

"destroys Shalash's statues." Whether you intended to or not, you are referring to Baxil's Mistress, whom we see do just that during Baxil's Interlude.

Quote

Mysty (paraphrased)
Is Baxil's Mistress destroying statues of the Herald Shalash?

Brandon Sanderson (paraphrased)
Yes. Actually in the prologue her statue is missing because Baxil's mistress came through.

---

tganchero (paraphrased)
Did the mistress from the interlude in book 1 destroy the Shalash statue on the night of Gavilar's death?

Brandon Sanderson (paraphrased)
Yes, and also all the other ones that we've seen, including the one in Shallan's vision in Words of Radiance.

Per this WoB, Reddit, a Death Rattle, this WoB(and the above), we have pretty indisputable confirmation that Baxil's Mistress is, in fact, Shalash.

Quote

Questioner
Would it be reasonable to assume that Baxil's mistress is Shalash?

Brandon Sanderson
Hehehe. That is a reasonable assumption, that Baxil's mistress is Shalash, or just Ash as she is normally known. That is a reasonable assumption. Whether I can confirm that it's true or not-- That should be one of the top candidates for who that is. 

---

Brandon Sanderson
Taln has what we'd call black skin pigmentation. So does Ash (the woman from the Baxil interlude.) Same for Sigzil.

Quote

A woman sits and scratches out her own eyes. Daughter of kings and winds, the vandal.

---

Chris King (Miyabi)
Is Shalash the daughter of Jezrien?

Brandon Sanderson
Umm... Oh, yes, she is his daughter.

1. Per the death rattle, the woman in question is daughter of kings and winds. As Herald of Windrunners, Herald of Kings, and a former King, Jezrien fits the bill.
2. Per the final WoB, Shalash is the daughter of Jezrien, which would make her the woman in the Death Rattle.
3. Per the death rattle, the woman scratches out her own eyes. The woman is Shalash, so she scratches out her eyes in the form of taking out Shalash statues.
4. Per the second set of WoBs, Baxil's Mistress is Ash, which is another name for the Herald Shalash.
5. Per the first set of WoBs, Baxil's Mistress is destroying statues of Shalash.

So what we've learned here is:

• The Woman in the Death Rattle is Shalash.
• The Woman in the Death Rattle is destroying Shalash Statues.
• Baxil's Mistress is destroying Shalash statues.
• Shalash is known as "Ash," and Baxil's Mistress is "Ash."

I used the word "indisputable" for a reason. Assuming that Ash/Baxil's Mistress is anyone other than the Herald Shalash is illogical, and has been since July 13, 2016(which is when Brandon gave us the "youngest" of these WoBs).

Edited February 15, 2018 by The One Who Connects
Forgot WoB Link

[Greywatch]

7 minutes ago, The One Who Connects said:

We know we will learn about all 10 Orders. We do not have confirmation that our 10 Flashback people will be of those Orders. Eshonai certainly isn't.

Timbre having been Eshonai's spren first, I think we can say Eshonai certainly was.

[The One Who Connects]

14 minutes ago, Greywatch said:

Timbre having been Eshonai's spren first, I think we can say Eshonai certainly was.

"Was" vs "Is" vs "Will be" (I consider the tense to be rather important this time)

Brandon said that the flashback character would not always be part of the focus Order. And so I suggested (this was back before we knew she was dead) that she didn't even have to be a part of an order at all during her book in order to satisfy what Brandon said. Unless our flashback character is currently bonded to a Nahel Spren, either during the main story or one of their flashbacks, then I do not count them as part of that Order during that Order's book.

Assuming Book 4 is the Willshaper book: Eshonai could have lived and become a Willshaper during Book 5, and that'd satisfy the "not always the same," since she wasn't a KR during that Order's book. The same can be said for her being dead, and thus not in an Order.

So that's why I don't consider her as a "Willshaper Flashback Character" (at the moment). Am I making sense, or are my thoughts still disorganized?

Edited February 15, 2018 by The One Who Connects
Forget Organization, I need Spellcheck...

[Greywatch]

2 minutes ago, The One Who Connects said:

"Was" vs "Is" vs "Will be" (I consider the tense to be rather important this time)

Brandon said that the flashback character would not always be part of the focus Order. And so I suggested (this was back before we knew she was dead) that she didn't even have to be a part of an order at all during her book in order to satisfy what Brandon said. Unless our flashback character is currently bonded to a Nahel Spren, either during the main story or one of their flashbacks, then I do not count them as part of that Order during that Order's book.

Assuming Book 4 is the Willshaper book: Eshonai could have lived and become a Willshaper during Book 5, and that'd satisfy the "not always the same," since she wasn't a KR during that Order's book. The same can be said for her being dead, and thus not in an Order.

So that's why I don't consider her as a "Willshaper Flashback Character" (at the moment). Am I making sense, or are my thoughts still disorganized?

Seeing as both Eshonai, the flashback character, and Venli, the current time viewpoint character taking over for her, are both Willshaper enough to count, I consider it actually moot.

[The One Who Connects]

Just now, Greywatch said:

Seeing as both Eshonai, the flashback character, and Venli, the current time viewpoint character taking over for her, are both Willshaper enough to count, I consider it actually moot.

Fair enough, but you know how we love our technicalities around here.

[Kaladin Zahel]

While I agree with Shallash being Ash, I have a problem with blatantly refusing anyone's theory regardless of evidence.

Brandon himself changes details in books he reads so that they are more enjoyable to him. There is a WoB where he mentions some character having a mustache and his buddy denying it in 'his' depiction of the character and completely supports interpreting the book the way the reader wishes.

So yes, offer up counter arguments so people who don't know can make more informed opinions of their reception of the story. But don't argue to the point of attempting to persuade them to see it your way.

Let creativity and enjoyment flow.

[RShara]

Isn't persuading someone to see something your way the point of arguing?  Hmmm.  As I said earlier, building theories based on evidence is great, we all do it and it's fun.

But coming up with an idea and forcing the evidence to stretch to meet your conclusion (i.e. assuming things to the point of implausibility)...well you can do it, but expect to be shot down.

[insert_anagram_here]

11 hours ago, digitalbusker said:

the Releasers (aka Dustbringers)

11 hours ago, digitalbusker said:

all the orders represented (the "Avengers Assemble" scene)

Yes, I didn't understand that reference the first time I read it that I assumed I was being mocked. My bad. 
@digitalbusker I agree that we don't have the full set of orders (or their corresponding Heralds) it's just that I think that Ash (as the person currently assumed as such by the end of OB, who is the same that destroys Shalash's statues and Baxal's mistress from tWoK) is not the Herald Shalash, but Chanarach (as part of Dustbringer order). ....And that Shallan stays as the representative of Lightweavers

10 hours ago, Weltall said:

As for what kind of argument this is, it's called an analogy

I know what an analogy is
It's more wisely used as a method of expression, a comparison between one thing and another, typically for the purpose of explanation or clarification. Because when used as an argument we are at risk of making a "faulty analogy" instead.

9 hours ago, The One Who Connects said:

Each book will focus on an Order. Book, not flashback character

Why not both? Wouldn't you think that would be a lot more "balanced" and an achievement to have on your bookshelf? 
Also, I'm under the impression that it's both the specific characters and the Orders / Heralds representative of that order from this WOB:
https://wob.coppermind.net/events/3-firefight-chicago-signing/#e113

Quote

Questioner

So the first one is Kaladin's backstory, the second is Shallan's backstory, who's next?

Brandon Sanderson

I actually haven't been able to decide yet. It's going to be one of the five for the first five books are Kaladin and Shallan and then Dalinar, Szeth, and Eshonai and I can't decide which one matches the next book best. And I'm going to have to write it...

Argent

What's the current list for the back five?

Brandon Sanderson

Current list for the back five... Jasnah, Lift, Ash, Renarin, and Taln.

 

9 hours ago, The One Who Connects said:

"destroys Shalash's statues." Whether you intended to or not, you are referring to Baxil's Mistress, whom we see do just that during Baxil's Interlude.

To clarify, yes, that was my intention. As I said above, I believe that Baxil's mistress is Chanarach and she is destroying Shalash's statues for a completely different reason than we think. Not because she is mad at her own self but because she wants to assume Shalash's identity.

9 hours ago, The One Who Connects said:

we have pretty indisputable confirmation that Baxil's Mistress is, in fact, Shalash.

I disagree.

9 hours ago, The One Who Connects said:

Per this WoB

Quote

That is a reasonable assumption. Whether I can confirm that it's true or not-- That should be one of the top candidates for who that is

I actually find it odd that BS specifically tries to clarify that when he says Ash, he links her to Baxil's mistress, but when he says Jezrien's daughter, he says Shalash.

 

9 hours ago, The One Who Connects said:

• The Woman in the Death Rattle is destroying Shalash Statues.
• Baxil's Mistress is destroying Shalash statues

Now who's equating two things that are not the same? Just because Ash(Baxil's mistress) destroys Shalash statues doesn't equate that she is Shalash. If I ride a bike and you ride a bike it doesn't mean that we are the same person. But if I was trying to impersonate you I would ride a bike just to convince of the identity.

 

Quite, honestly I'm not sure why she would do it but we do know that Heralds go mad. It seems that some go a lot more mad than others though and I wonder if that's related to how much time they spent in Damnation.

In order to try and make more sense to you, (if that's possible) my whole logic started from the fact that a Lightweaver tends to take on personas and hiding his/her original identity, as part of a defensive mechanism. (at least that's what Shallan does but it would also makes sense to put that kind of power into espionage use). So Shalash, a mad Herald, of a Lightweaver-kind of power, would make more sense that she would be lost in those personas and unable to be found. It kinda seems like a waste to have that opportunity as an author and not use it, right? BS could purposeful be misleading us into thinking that Ash(Baxil's Mistress) is the same as Shalash (who also had the Ash pseudonym) only to make the revelation more impact-ful.

 

9 hours ago, The One Who Connects said:

Assuming that Ash/Baxil's Mistress is anyone other than the Herald Shalash is illogical

 Hahaha, okay. I admit I'm not always completely rational but I do admit this is just a theory. Even I don't know if I'm right.

5 hours ago, RShara said:

Isn't persuading someone to see something your way the point of arguing?

I don't want to argue @RShara. You are entitled to your theories, I'm entitled to mine. It's just a forum for discussion. I'm not here to prove I'm smart.
 

5 hours ago, RShara said:

expect to be shot down

Yes, I have come to realize that is how things go on the 17th Shard even if I did hope, when I joined, initially, that it would be different than Reddit.

Edited February 15, 2018 by insert_anagram_here
crem, typos, grammar

[RShara]

14 minutes ago, insert_anagram_here said:

Yes, I have come to realize that is how things go on the 17th Shard even if I did hope, when I joined, initially, that it would be different than Reddit.

I'm sorry, I guess you're taking "shot down" as negative.  I mean, we all care about this fandom and many of us have many theories.  But we also want to be accurate in our theories.  I mean, I can say that I think Jezrien was Tanavast's Cognitive Shadow hiding from Odium, and that's why he was killed.  But with 0 evidence anywhere, I would rightfully be refuted pretty quickly.

And this is a good thing.  Wildly speculative theories can be fun, but they are also misleading, especially for newcomers to the fandom.  Someone could read "Ash is really Chana" and if there's no debate, they might think that was a known fact, when it isn't.  I kind of feel like you're saying, "No one should ever disagree with anyone else's theories, no matter how speculative they are" and I think that's a bad path to take.  For one thing, it'd be boring.  For another, it wouldn't much expand our understanding of the Cosmere.

We have to make sure our theories are faithful and accurate to the text.  It's not personal.  No one is making personal attacks, which is the difference between here and reddit.   Everyone in this thread has been respectful and polite, just completely and utterly disagreeing.  There's nothing wrong with that.

 

As for your theory.  The Death Rattle says, "A woman sits and scratches out her own eyes.  Daughter of Kings and Winds, the vandal."

So her own eyes.  She is scratching out the eyes and faces of her own depictions.  She is the Daughter of Kings and Winds.  This is clearly referring to Shalash, as Shalash is Jezrien's daughter.  Jezrien is King of Kings, and Herald of the Windrunners. 

So who have we seen scratching out and destroying depictions of Shalash?  Ash.  And since it's the woman scratching out her own eyes, Ash must be Shalash, scratching out her own (Shalash's) eyes and faces in artwork.

 

I really don't understand how this can be read in any other way.

Edited February 15, 2018 by RShara

[insert_anagram_here]

6 minutes ago, RShara said:

disagreeing.  There's nothing wrong with that.

I agree with that. But "shot down" is a little bit more aggressive of a phrase to use . Still, I have no issue with disagreement. I love theories! (edit: so much even that I'll put myself in the disadvantageous position to express it and argue about it)

It's just that I don't feel the responsibility to 'guide new people to the fandom'. 

6 minutes ago, RShara said:

So who have we seen scratching out and destroying depictions of Shalash?  Ash.  And since it's the woman scratching out her own eyes, Ash must be Shalash, scratching out her own (Shalash's) eyes and faces in artwork.

As I said earlier

Quote

Just because Ash(Baxil's mistress) destroys Shalash statues doesn't equate that she is Shalash. If I ride a bike and you ride a bike it doesn't mean that we are the same person. But if I was trying to impersonate you I would ride a bike just to convince of the identity.

 

Edited February 15, 2018 by insert_anagram_here

[RShara]

*shrug*  I guess it's how you look at it.  I have no problem with being shot down if I'm wrong.  It's happened plenty of times, and I'm usually grateful for the additional insight.

And you don't have to.  But new people shouldn't be misled just because people don't like being disagreed with.

 

No, Ash destroying Shalash statues by itself doesn't equate.  Until you add in the Death Rattle that I posted.

If I ride a bike and you ride a bike, and someone says, "The person riding the blue bike is ereh_margrana_tresni" then it's pretty clear that you're the one riding the blue bike, not me.

[Weltall]

6 minutes ago, insert_anagram_here said:

As I said earlier: Just because Ash(Baxil's mistress) destroys Shalash statues doesn't equate that she is Shalash. If I ride a bike and you ride a bike it doesn't mean that we are the same person. But if I was trying to impersonate you I would ride a bike just to convince of the identity.

Only if you completely ignore that Brandon refers to Ash and Shalash as the same person, in favor of a ridiculously strained interpretation that because the former is a nickname for the latter, they could somehow be two different people with one assuming the other's identity. To say that this explanation throws logic completely out the window would be an understatement.

Also, bear in mind that in the WoR Prologue, Kalak says that Ash is getting worse. This statement makes absolutely no sense if he and Nale do not both understand this to mean Shalash.

Edited February 15, 2018 by Weltall

[RShara]

I mean the idea is interesting, but let's look at the premises:

Chana has to actually be thinking of herself as "Ash."  To the point where she obsessively and compulsively destroys all depictions of "Shalash."  We see in OB that this isn't a *voluntary* thing.  She must destroy any depiction of Shalash, no matter what else is happening. She's not doing it to hide herself, she literally cannot help it, because she feels like she doen't deserve to be glorified.  She has no compulsion to destroy the sketches that Hoid did.

Taln has to misrecognize Chana as Ash.

Chana has to be "The daughter of Kings and Winds."

Chana has to have some really weird motive to impersonate Ash. Literally no one would care if she's Chana or Ash, except the other Heralds, who would recognize her anyway.

We would have had to have seen Shalash running around in some other fashion, as Brandon explicitly states that we have seen "Shalash Running Around."

Chana's nickname would have to be Ash, instead of Chana.

 

I feel like there are too many assumptions that contradict the text for this theory to be valid.

Edited February 15, 2018 by RShara

[insert_anagram_here]

52 minutes ago, RShara said:

I'm sorry, I guess you're taking "shot down" as negative. 

You just changed your original post to answer my next post, then answered with two other posts as well  All in a matter of minutes!

This is what I call being 'shot down', there is this rush to dismiss another person's theory when they just posted the thing. Then a ton of other people answer, some without even giving the amount of time to interpret the meaning correctly and provide facts (source and quotes) and certainly not equating to the amount and effort the OP has spent.

What I'm saying this attitude stifles diversity and new opinions when they try to be expressed.  

 

52 minutes ago, RShara said:

"No one should ever disagree with anyone else's theories, no matter how speculative they are"

I never said that. I'm saying, instead of feeling responsible of drilling into every newbie what the current cognitive general opinion of the forums is, give people some space and let them express themselves even if you don't personally agree with them.

 

Now to address the arguments:

39 minutes ago, Weltall said:

Brandon refers to Ash and Shalash as the same person

Yes, he could purposeful be misleading us into thinking that Ash(Baxil's Mistress) is the same as Shalash (who also had the Ash pseudonym). Read my thought of process in my previous post.

39 minutes ago, Weltall said:

Also, bear in mind that in the WoR Prologue, Kalak says that Ash is getting worse. This statement makes absolutely no sense if he and Nale do not both understand this to mean Shalash.

Yes, Kalak and Nale, since they are lucid enough, they probably know who and where Shalash is, either if it is Baxil's mistress or not.

29 minutes ago, RShara said:

Taln has to misrecognize Chana as Ash.

He is the maddest of them all so I can see how he wouldn't actually.

29 minutes ago, RShara said:

Chana has to be "The daughter of Kings and Winds."

No. Shalash is that one.

29 minutes ago, RShara said:

We would have had to have seen Shalash running around in some other fashion, as Brandon explicitly states that we have seen "Shalash Running Around."

Yes exactly why he could be purposefully doing this. If Baxil's mistress isn't actually Shalash, it's probably someone we know.

1 hour ago, insert_anagram_here said:

BS could purposeful be misleading us into thinking that Ash(Baxil's Mistress) is the same as Shalash (who also had the Ash pseudonym) only to make the revelation more impact-ful.

 

29 minutes ago, RShara said:

Chana has to have some really weird motive to impersonate Ash. Literally no one would care if she's Chana or Ash, except the other Heralds, who would recognize her anyway.

29 minutes ago, RShara said:

she obsessively and compulsively destroys all depictions of "Shalash." 

These are good points actually and it probably has to do with the explanation of her insanity. That's as far as my answer can get right now.

 

I'm expressing the original idea in the hope to find a like minded person, that would entertain the thought with me so we figure it out. Please bare with me and assume that she is Chanarach, join me in the thought process here will you? Even if you don't agree at all. How would Chanarach be linked to this action, based on her values and the certain insanity that the Heralds have? Just entertain the thought and let negativity flow away from your body.

 

Edited February 15, 2018 by insert_anagram_here

[RShara]

2 minutes ago, insert_anagram_here said:

Just entertain the thought and let negativity flow away from your body.

I'm sorry, this kinda irks me.  Just because I don't think this theory is valid doesn't mean I'm being negative.  I am being very patient and explanatory.  Being negative is something else completely. 

Quote

32 minutes ago, RShara said:

Chana has to be "The daughter of Kings and Winds."

No. Shalash is that one.

Okay, so you still don't address my question.  That death rattle says basically that the daughter of kings and winds is scratching out her own eyes.

You agree that Shalash is the daughter of Kings and Winds.

So how can Shalash not be the one scratching out her eyes, since the death rattle clearly refers to her?  Or to rephrase, "A woman sits and scratches out her own eyes.  Shalash, the vandal."

At the time that Taln recognized Ash, he was lucid.  He even knew that Dalinar was waiting for him. 

I'm sorry, I don't think I can dive into wildly speculative theories that I feel are wrong.  I can play devil's advocate with the best of them, but this isn't the same.

[Yata]

I can't understan how the Chana=Ash theory could work.

- We Know the Character showed in OB is Shalash_Daughter_of_Jez for both the Jez's death scene and Taln recognize her.

- That Character is the one who destroyes Arts about Shalash as we could see from the Interlude in Mraize's mansion and she use the Mraize's informations to later find Taln

- Baxil's mistress description fit the one of Shalash in OB

- We know from sure that Shalash's nickname is Ash

I can't understand how Chana could fit in this

Edited February 15, 2018 by Yata

[Bort]

17 hours ago, Willow said:

Also, most of the Heralds' insanities (that we've seen) seem to be a corruption of their original intent, and I don't really know how Brave and Obedient (Chana's attributes) twist themselves into impersonating people. I would find it a more logical corruption if it was Shalash who had started pretending to be another herald (Creativity and Honesty being her original attributes).

This is why I think the Unmade are made out of part of the Heralds. Look at Jezrien and flashback Dalinar. The similarities between them are blatantly obvious, especially in the scene where they end up drinking together. And what is the most common thing they have there? They are lost without the touch of the Thrill. I think this is because Nergaoul was part of Jezrien until Jezrien first broke under Odium's tortures. I also think this is why Jezrien was killed when he was, because if Dalinar had united Jezrien and The Thrill, I think that would have healed him.

[digitalbusker]

5 hours ago, insert_anagram_here said:

I'm expressing the original idea in the hope to find a like minded person, that would entertain the thought with me so we figure it out.

You're not going to figure anything out by ignoring the evidence against your theory. That's not analysis, that's... I don't know, a creative writing exercise?

The way to do that would have been to start a topic called "[OB] Ash's Identity" or some such, and open your post with something like "I know this is not the accepted theory, but I have this feeling that Ash might not be Shalash, and I'd like to discuss it...."

Would that post have gotten two replies immediately citing contrary evidence and then fallen off the front page forever? Maybe. Is it sad when that happens? Yeah. Is that better or worse than starting a thread and having it hijacked halfway through the first page by a post that starts "The theory that $tangentially_related_noun is $commonly_accepted_synonym is just that: a theory" and then kicks off a giant argument? Unclear.

[insert_anagram_here]

8 minutes ago, digitalbusker said:

You're not going to figure anything out by ignoring the evidence against your theory. That's not analysis, that's... I don't know, a creative writing exercise?

The way to do that would have been to start a topic called "[OB] Ash's Identity" or some such, and open your post with something like "I know this is not the accepted theory, but I have this feeling that Ash might not be Shalash, and I'd like to discuss it...."

Would that post have gotten two replies immediately citing contrary evidence and then fallen off the front page forever? Maybe. Is it sad when that happens? Yeah. Is that better or worse than starting a thread and having it hijacked halfway through the first page by a post that starts "The theory that $tangentially_related_noun is $commonly_accepted_synonym is just that: a theory" and then kicks off a giant argument? Unclear.

Does it say somewhere that 17th Shard should only be used for analysis and not for creating discussion exercises? 

As Rshara said earlier and I answered back to her:

18 hours ago, insert_anagram_here said:

18 hours ago, RShara said:

I just keep those to myself most of the time

I do too mostly, otherwise I'd be flooding the forums with theory threads. It's just that I saw @jefftucker0525 voicing one of them and wanted to agree with him so he doesn't feel cornered and attacked. 

If you find that I've hijacked the thread and I'm completely irrelevant to the original post feel free to report me.

[digitalbusker]

16 minutes ago, insert_anagram_here said:

Does it say somewhere that 17th Shard should only be used for analysis and not for creating discussion exercises? 

As Rshara said earlier and I answered back to her:

If you find that I've hijacked the thread and I'm completely irrelevant to the original post feel free to report me.

I'm not here to enforce forum rules. The question of analysis versus creative discussion was about whether what you're doing is likely to get you what you say you want.

I think we're probably past diminishing returns on this conversation now, so I'll take my leave.

[Rainier]

17 hours ago, insert_anagram_here said:

Aha that's interesting! Can you give me more details on why you believe this?

As others have said, the scene in Thaylen City where Dalinar starts listing off orders and identifying people. The fact that our 10 book characters (Eshonai excluded) just so happen to be the same as our 10 founding Radiants (or at least 7 thus far) is all the confirmation I needed. Once we had the 10 people, and we noticed that Ash was the odd one out, it made sense to slot her in as a Releaser, especially given that she's rejected the idealized version of herself that's worshiped and has been compelled to destroy her likeness.

I just figured that the two Heralds who seem to like one another, who also happened to be there when Dalinar started counting, will become Radiants like we were shown can happen by Nale. There's a lot of subtle stuff in Sanderson's works, I just didn't think this scene was one of them. 

[Isilel]

On 14.2.2018 at 8:19 PM, WhiteLeeopard said:

My main problem with Lyss as Chana is that she owned Szeth and gave him away. Seems...strange to sell him, or to buy him in the first place, as she should have recognized an Honorblade holder in a heartbeat.

 

IMHO, if she is a Herald, she bought him expressly _because_ she knew that he had Jezrien's Honorblade. Though, to be honest, since the art for Oathbringer was published, I have begun to think that Liss, might be Vedel, instead of Chana. It may be just a case of artistic liberty, of course, but her portrait in OB seems to fit the description of Liss in WoR pretty closely. Liss just doesn't look athletic and soldiery enough to be Chana, IMHO. It also turned out that the idea that we _must_ have seen Chana on-screen because of the WoB that we have seen a member of every Order, if we count their Heralds, and there hadn't been any other Dustbringers on page, was flawed. The female Radiant appearing in Dalinar's Purelake vision is one - she has reddish armor and uses Abrasion to move easily through the water.

And of course, it makes perfect sense that a fellow Herald would have relinquished Szeth if Nale asked her to, which, IMHO, he did.

 

On 14.2.2018 at 8:42 PM, Weltall said:

 We do have the conversation between Nale and Kalak indicating that they knew he had an Honorblade but it's quite possible that Nale already was aware of that (he's been watching Szeth for a long time) as opposed to their having some method of sensing that he was carrying one. So if Liss is Chana, she wouldn't necessarily have the means to know Szeth was carrying Jezrien's blade unless the latter revealed it in some way.

 

Yes, I have played with the idea that Nale was somehow involved with Szeth being proclaimed Truthless. After all, we now know that Szeth had been in the early stages of bonding with a spren when he attempted to warn his people - or maybe just the Shamans, about the imminent return of the Voidbringers. From everything that we now know about them, Szeth's original spren couldn't have been a highspren, who, apparently, shared Nale's beliefs that a Desolation could be stalled forever if the other Orders weren't around to rock the boat.

In any case, we don't know if the other Heralds had the means to find out if somebody carried a Honorblade or not. IMHO, it is quite possible that they did, or that Nale could have just told them to keep an eye on Szeth.

 

13 hours ago, insert_anagram_here said:

And that Shallan stays as the representative of Lightweavers

IIRC, nobody in this thread suggested that Shallash would represent the Lightweavers instead of Shallan. Current consensus among  the SA theorists is that she will become a Dustbringer and represent them.

Quote

To clarify, yes, that was my intention. As I said above, I believe that Baxil's mistress is Chanarach and she is destroying Shalash's statues for a completely different reason than we think. Not because she is mad at her own self but because she wants to assume Shalash's identity.

 

But Ash's PoV in OB states that the Heralds don't look like their iconography anyway, so there is no reason for anybody to destroy their images for the purposes of identity theft. 

Edited February 15, 2018 by Isilel