happyman he/him Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 Personally, I think the old reptile is more of a teasing thing. It's like calling your mother an old hag if she's being frustrating. At least, that's what I got out of it. Given that the unpublished book that's part of the main cosmological arc (along with Mistborn and WoK) is called Dragonsteel, I hope you aren't offended if I keep the option of it being somewhat literal on the table.
Zas678 he/him Posted September 5, 2011 Posted September 5, 2011 Quote from Brandon! Feifner: Do you think you will ever include dragons in your books?Dragonsteel, a series I’ll do someday, has Dragons in it. Hint: This world/series is very important to Hoid.
MindCanaries Posted September 8, 2011 Posted September 8, 2011 Yeah, I am definitely going to assume that the recipient of the letter is literally a reptile.
CrazyRioter she/her Posted September 8, 2011 Posted September 8, 2011 also, this adds even more credence to the notion that Hoid wrote the letter.
Ari he/him Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 I fully support the idea that Sazed is involved with the Seventeenth Shard, but I'm not certain he is the recipient of the letter. Well Kerry, of course it has to do with Adonalsium What doesn't? I think it's interesting that Brandon said "time dilation" techniques, rather than what I had thought, which was Hoid actually jumping through time. This seems more reasonable. I mean, we have cadmium and bendalloy, after all. I'm pretty sure Sazed can't be the recipient of the letter, given that it implies personal knowledge of shardholders on the recipient's part that Sazed simply would not have had. I'll stay firmly out of the discussion of whether the person the letter is addressed to is literally a reptile or not, lol.
Chaos he/him Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 I'm pretty sure Sazed can't be the recipient of the letter, given that it implies personal knowledge of shardholders on the recipient's part that Sazed simply would not have had. I agree with this.
Guest Galavantes Posted September 11, 2011 Posted September 11, 2011 I'm pretty sure Sazed can't be the recipient of the letter, given that it implies personal knowledge of shardholders on the recipient's part that Sazed simply would not have had. I'll stay firmly out of the discussion of whether the person the letter is addressed to is literally a reptile or not, lol. I haven't gone back to reread the text of the letter recently, but I don't think the letter requires previous knowledge of the original(?) Shardholders, it only requires that the recipient has at some point learned of them. For instance the line (from memory): "Ati was once a kind and generous man, and you saw what became of him" This implies that the writer (hoid ) had previous knowledge of Ati, but the recipient would only need to know what "became of him", which Sazed certainly witnessed. I don't think the text of the letter explicitly excludes Sazed from being the recipient. However I do think the tone is incorrect for a letter that is addressed to Sazed. Especially the old reptile comment, I can't see anyone who knows Sazed at all would think a comment like that could apply to him. I'm convinced that the recipient is someone we haven't met yet (directly anyway).
Ari he/him Posted September 12, 2011 Posted September 12, 2011 Right, I wasn't so much referring to the words exact meaning so much as the choice of approach in writing the letter. It implies a degree of knowledge and understanding of other shardholders, even if it doesn't actively come out and say it. For instance- why would you casually reference Ati being a kind and generous man to someone who didn't know him? The reality wouldn't sink home about the change because you'd have no real baseline for comparison. You'd need to go over the point a lot with someone who didn't know any Shardbearers beforehand, and Hoid doesn't do this.
Recommended Posts