Thought

It might be worthwhile to note that Derethil's name is very similar to the name of the Almighty: Elithanathile. Sure, it looks like there is only that "thil" that relates them, but the rest of the word is very much the same from a linguistic perspective. D and TH, for example, are almost the same letter (a number of German and English words are only different because our languages shifted one way or the other on that sound). Ending vowels are often dropped, and a vowel shift between a and e is common, so "Tharathile" becomes a very plausibly corrupted version of Elithanathile. The main problem is just that there is no common consonant shift that I am aware of to turn an N into an R, or vice versa. Though if we allow for possible scribing errors, then that becomes much more likely. And if we take into consideration the influence of Jewish culture on the story already, turning Thanathile into El'Thanathile (aka, Elithanathile) isn't much of a step if Derethil was to be deified. Also, Elithanathile appears very similarly to a ketek. I wonder, then, if its various components reveal important information.

Hoid's story about Derethil and the Wandersail seems pertinent here. Derethil sailed westward in a ship that could survive Highstorms. That means he was sailing away from the storms, yes? If he was, why did he need a marvelous ship that could semi-survive them? The answer seems to be that either the storms don't really die down as they pass over Roshar, or they pick up speed ridiculously quick once out at sea. Also, since it was suggested that Honor might be in the west, the spiraling vortex where "the ocean drains" seems like it might be an interesting thing to consider.

The curious thing here, though, is that it wasn't generally recognized as a 16-system until rather recently. If you recall, people thought there were only 10 metals in the first book (and, thus, for the majority of the existence of mistborn). Perhaps it is just that simple? Magic systems have "ten" abilities that are common knowledge, with the full 16 abilities limited, really, to those who have gained shardic knowledge?

You make a good point about Miles' statement not necessarily being prophecy. Given all the death statements in tWoK, I am still inclined to think it was, but there is certainly reasonable doubt on that point. However, I'd suggest that you are presenting a false dichotomy there. "Literal" and "shard" colors don't have to be mutually exclusive. The Lord Ruler's clothing was white and black. Perhaps those were a bit fancier than a cigar box, and a bit less cryptic than a mysterious group of red and gold, but along those same lines regardless. However, he had chosen those colors (or so Sazed thought) to represent that he was the vicar of the gods of Scadrial. Of course, that wasn't actually true. He served both, inadvertently at times, but he never held Ruin's power, and only a sliver of Preservation's. He was largely a free agent who associated himself with those colors. Thus, while red and gold might not directly represent a shard, it still might be referencing those shards, in the same way that TLR's white and black clothes referenced shards.

@Windrunner, I wasn't aware that there was really any evidence, one way or the other, as to who the Red and Gold were. However, I do agree that it is unlikely that Sanderson will mix the Cosmere worlds too much. I'd expect that if I am correct in this, then Domination and Whoever will appear as a self-contained reference. That is, one wont need to have read the rest of Sanderson's books to enjoy it. The more I think about it, the more the southern scadrials don't really make much sense (no magic, except a few mistings, no supplies from the reshaping of the world, and no words of founding from sazed). @Reader, my main objection there is that for the wall to be the Parsh, they'd really need to be the voidbringers to be significant enough, but that is problematic. For one, the Heralds told humanity that the voidbringers had been pushed out of the physical realm. The parsh would have been obvious evidence that that was a lie. Also, while the voidbringers are described as beings of fire and burned skin, the most that can really be said about the Parsh is that they have burned skin. There's nothing aflame about them, it seems. And, of course, the very fact that Jasnah thinks the two are one in the same in the first book of a 10ish book series is an indication that she hasn't completed her try-fail cycle yet. Also, you are assuming that the ten people are in opposition to the wall, rather than in defense of it. Their weapons are indeed out, but they are just standing there. That is a fairly passive stance: they aren't attacking, charging, fighting, defying, etc the wall. They are just standing before it. Not necessarily even facing it, just before it. The wall, similarly, is... well, a wall. Those aren't known as very mobile things. So, of the two important images we have in the quote, both are passive. That isn't really what one would expect if the Heralds were facing the Parsh or the Voidbringers. As for the numbers, I had mistakenly thought that was an established correlation. But your explanation is good (I hadn't thought about 10 in Warbreaker, yet). Anywho, another interesting quote that may reference Ruin, Preservation, and Domination is from chapter 53 (Dunny): This could potentially refer to those three: towers are for those who protect/preserve things, crowns are for those who rule/dominate things, and spears are for those who destory/ruin things. However, that said, it is probably more of a reference to Dalinar. Finding a list of glyphpairs is difficult, but since Dalinar's chapters have a tower and crown, I think those are his.

Huh. "There was coin to be had" was the one line that was added later (actually, right before I posted the section, since I was worried that there wasn't enough punch), so I find it very interesting that you picked it out specifically. Probably means that it was a mistake on my part! I do indeed like complex constructions. I tend to need to come back through, after I've written things, and break single sentences into full paragraphs (yes, I can be that bad). You are quite right, "happening" is undesirable. I hadn't been able to think of anything better myself, but perhaps it isn't needed at all? Anywho, I tried to rework it with your comments in mind:

Ivory, my comment was intended to be humorous. It's your story: if you have to have something, then you have to have it. Our role is to give our reactions, it is up to you to figure out how to use it. As for lines, there was mine above, if you feel like getting revenge against me.

Ah, well if quarrels are as important to your story as spren were to tWok, then by all means

Just to be clear, what is proper and what is prudent are different things. Perhaps I am just grossly underestimating people, but I'd think most would wonder why verbal arguments are being hurled against the barricade. The martial definition of quarrel isn't well known, in my estimation. Quarrel might be a technically correct term, but if it confuses readers, it should go. But, it is your choice as to how much you want to trust your readers. That said: a quarrel is a specific type of crossbow bolt, but not all bolt are quarrels. In a similar manner, a bolt is a specific type of arrow, but it is still an arrow.

Having not seen this yet discussed (forgive me if I've overlooked something), I would like to propose that each shard has its own unique color and that references to those colors in other books are hints at cosmere-wide events and trends. Based on this, I believe we can fairly well conclude that at one point Ruin, Preservation, and Domination once were part of a triumvirate. As those two points seem quite divergent, allow me to ease into the matter more slowly. First, from Sazed's comments in the HoA bumps, we know that black is the color of Ruin, and white is the color of Preservation. Thus, we have two colors already established for us. Second, there are (at least) two other important colors that have been identified in the books: Red and Gold. Namely, these form part of Miles' prophecy at the end of Alloy of Law. If we knew what shards Red and Gold represented, we would have a hint at what is coming to Scadrial. Third, based on this, we know that Ruin and Preservation have a past relationship with "Red." The chapter 9 (Damnation) bump from tWoK's is as follows: I am proposing that black and white here are referencing Ruin and Preservation (and likely Ati and Leras specifically). This gives us two other shardic actors, though. Red and the 10 people (the heralds, presumably, in place of Honor). The three colors in the wall seem to be particularly important in the light of another quote, this time from the 11th chapter of tWoK's: Unfortunately, the first part of this quote can be taken 3 different ways. Shards each seem to have a number associated with then. Honor, for example, is 10, while preservation is 16. So, "three of sixteen" could mean 3 individual members of the group of 16 shards, or it could mean Shard#3. Because the Three seem to be an important part of Rosharian mythology, I am inclined to assume that it is referring to three different individuals. As such, these three individuals seem likely to be the Black, White, and Red mentioned before. Support for this comes in two different forms. First, The Letter states that Ati was once a good person, which one would hopefully want in a leader. This is a very brief description, admittedly, but we can better believe that Ati once ruled than, say, Rhyse. The second support is in the first quote. Ten people are standing before a wall. Given the numerical significance, we can be fairly sure that these are the representation of Honor. Is honor standing in opposition to or in defense of the wall? Given the emphasis on knightly defense in tWoK's, it seems more likely that Honor is here on the defense, protecting the wall. Further, if we take Black, White, and Red to be the 3 of 16 mentioned who once ruled, then it is likely that Honor would be honor-bound to them. Indeed, it is unlikely that Honor would have subverted them (though possible). Yet, we are told that "The Broken One" now rules. This could reference any of the shattered shards, but again, given that this is in tWoK's, it seems likely that it is referring to Honor. So, then, it seems likely that Black and White (that is, Preservation/Leras and Ruin/Ati) once ruled (along with Red), with Honor as a sort of royal guard. Who, then, is Red? That answer, I believe, is in Elantris. The Derethi, whom are generally believed to be followers of a religion influenced by the existence of Skai/Dominion, wear a lot of red, and red seems to generally be a holy color for them. Thus, Skai/Domination appears to be the most likely contender for who Red represents. If we plug this information in to the various quotes, that would mean that Domination, Ruin, and Preservation were a triumvirate that ruled at one point, with Honor as a sort of guard. If that is correct, perhaps then Odium has a grudge against the Triumvirate specifically? Honor would have been shattered first, as he was protecting the others, then he happened to attack Domination first, and will now turn his sights to Ruin and Preservation. That doesn't explain why he left Cultivation intact (if she is intact) while shattering Devotion, however. Additionally, Miles' prophecy then means that we should expect to see Skai/Domination agents on Scadrial, eventually, along with "Gold"'s agents. Who is gold? There is currently no good answer, to my knowledge. It may be Honor (as that would fit with the people before the wall imagery), but I haven't seen anything in tWoK's that strongly suggests that Honor is linked to gold, and I haven't read Warbreaker yet. That would make sense, however: the remains of a former protector would have reason to continue to defend the remains of a former lord, yes? The other shard that we have a hint of color at, that I am aware of, is Aona. Both blue and silver seem to be fairly common in Elantris, but, unfortunately, they don't seem to be as commonly present as Red, so that might just be random chance. By any chance does anyone else know of a color related to a shard or hints about the cosmere that might be referencing shardic colors?

I'd agree with Reader that there are too many adjectives. Actually, for quick action, it is too wordy in general. I struck out the ones I think could easily go. I think there is also a problem with tenses (though good lord, tenses are annoying things, so I might be wrong). I think that, basically, you are having the spray of wood chips happen concurrently or before the arrow hits the barricade, not as a result of. Likewise, the arrow is burying itself in the wood before it has penetrated. Combining a past tense in the independent clause with an imperfect tense in the dependent clause skews the meaning of when events occur (it makes something in the present occur before or at the same time as something in the past). Regarding word choice, I suspect most people aren't familiar with the arrow-ish definition of "quarrel," and so that might confuse. And finally, I thought Aaron was already behind the barricade (as indicated by the arrow coming within an inch of his sternum after it hits the barricade and punches through). So why is he dropping behind it again? Do you mean that he is falling further back from it?

Not bad. Like Reader, I like the juxtapositioning. This is undermined by the first half being a bit… tell-y. I don’t buy that the day was beautiful: the justifications you give aren’t convincing. The sun was shining? The sun shines in December, too! The leaves were green? Mistletoe has green leaves! This could be a dreary, horribly December day just as easily as a happy, beautiful May day. And, some people (myself included) might like the December day more than the May one, so being told that something horribly sun-shiny is beautiful makes me want to be contrary. Perhaps, have a character tell us why they find it to be a beautiful day? “My favorite birds, robins, were skipping about the trees like three year olds on a jungle gym.” “The air had an attractive cleanness to it, like the scent of a woman’s freshly washed hair.” “The plants had discarded the last of their winter-shyness and were embracing the warm weather with wild abandon.” Etc. Meh. I’m not really interested in foreordained things. Knowing that things were predicted undermines their urgency, especially when it is that way right off the bat. Sanderson gets it to work, for me, because usually it is the characters that care about the prophesy, and since I care about the characters, I care about it, too. Jordan had less luck, and once the characters accepted it and moved on, I did too. Also, I’m tired of dragons, and hence dragonstones, but that is mostly a flaw with me. I think that would be a fine line, elsewhere in the book. Here, it gives us a lot of naval gazing right off the bat. I’d actually recommend going with the last line first. “Why was I compelled to help them?” That gives us a sense of action, the warm fuzzies (yay for help), and the perception that this guy is complex and remorseful. And, again, in recompense for any harshness on my part, here's another of one of mine to be criticized and mocked: And the context:

@Voldy, the necessity for professionalization is well attested to historically, and that process can only happen and continue to happen when oversight for a field is entrusted to professionals within that field. Since you didn't name any particular arguments to support your position, I cannot comment on them (indeed, as far as I am familiar with Plato and Aristotle, they made no such arguments, but then, I am no expert on them either). Medicine was one of the first professionalized fields, and this process occurred in the latter part of the Middle Ages. As such, it is often used as a case study in this process. The fact that there are still unprofessionalized practitioners makes it relevant here. Why do we trust licensed doctors but not, say, reflexologists? The reason is because we know that a licensed doctor has been trained and that someone who knows what they are talking about has said that THIS doctor also knows what he is talking about. We don't trust reflexologists because they have no such vouchsafes. If there is an honest one out there, they're surrounded by hordes of charlatans. And, if there is an honest one out there, they still didn't have a standardized training. Good intentions don't make up for ignorance. Because we trust licensed medical professionals, we can easily find the medical aid we need. The trust we have in doctors, and the benefits we receive from it, are directly related to the professionalization process. Starting in the Middle Ages, medical practitioners began to value book-learning (aka, University education). Those who were educated performed more reliably, thereby gaining the trust of their patients. The practitioners had a reason to exclude unreliable individuals, as those individuals undermined the reputation of all medical practitioners. As quacks were excluded, the profession was trusted more, which allows greater mobility of its members and quicker dissemination of new technology, techniques, and treatments. It also brought in greater and more reliable profits for its members. Oversight boards comprised of non-professionals are inherently problematic because they are not motivated by the same need for honesty that professionals are. Nor are they trained in such a way to recognize what is proper and what is not. The most effective non-professional governing bodies are those that refer and defer to professionals (as we tend to see in court cases involving medical practitioners). Or, in other words, the best non-professional boards are the ones who are just figureheads for professionals. Education is already a troubled professional field. For one, teachers are paid too little, particularly in comparison to the economic prosperity that they generate. This has the effect of siphoning away individuals who would have otherwise been excellent professionals. Lack of reward also relaxes the professionalization force within the field. The permeability between the profession and other professions is likewise a hindrance. It gives the impression that the field isn't rigorous (and, to be fair, it is less rigorous than it should be, but that is largely the result of non-professional interference). Why, then, should education be further hindered by forcing an uninitiated governing body on it? If the profession acknowledges a book, like Ender's Game, as being a piece of literature that children should read, then it is in their best interest to speak from honesty and experience. Administrators have neither that motivation nor aid. If they agree with professionals, then they are superfluous. If they disagree with professionals, then they are detrimental to the process. When the greatest good a governing body can aspire to is to be irrelevant, that governing body should not exist. Indeed, we have already seen the problems that non-professional interference in education has produced. Even now, there are schools in the United States that do not teach the critical foundation of modern biology and medicine (aka, Evolution). Worse, some schools teach incorrect information in its place. These events are not brought about by professionals but by non(and ex)-professionals. Further, look at Texas, which is continuing to mangle history education in order to achieve political goals. Now, it is a small matter if a single school has its children read Ender's Game. That in itself won’t end the world. However, it is a specific instance of a larger, destructive trend: non-professionals are being allowed to meddle with education. @Aethling, I agree, teachers are indeed held to a higher standard than the general public. Which is exactly why we train them specifically to meet those standards. Why, then, should we allow untrained individuals who we do not hold to high standards to be the ones to make important professional decisions? Authority and responsibility go hand in hand.

First, sorry Jack, I accidentally downvoted you. I... don't think there is a way to undo that. Second, though, I think you might misunderstand what treating writing like work means. As top-tier writers, like Sanderson or Anderson (apparently, having patronym for a surname is fortuitous), use it, it seems to just mean that you consistently practice in order to have a writing career. They aren't talking about how to have a secretive love affair with writing. To help illustrate the point, consider the difference between exercising because you enjoy exercising, and exercising to run a marathon. You can't just run whenever the fancy takes you for as long as the fancy takes you and still expect to be able to do well in a marathon. Likewise with a writing career. Considering that Sanderson was just spending all day at ComicCon then going back to his hotel room to write for 5 hours, I think we can safely assume that he loves writing. However, he said himself on writing excuses that he hates the 50-75% portion of a book and, unless he treated writing like work, he wouldn't do that. He loves writing when he is doing it, even when he is writing those loathed sections, by the end, he is having a blast. Your philosophy just seems like an excuse to give up on writing. Everyone has those days when they don't want to write, when they think they're crap, etc. Neil Giggidy Gaiman has them! Either the great authors of our age don't truly love writing, or having an off day is not indicative of a person’s love of writing. It is no reason to give up, and certainly no reason to not write that day. You said "treating writing like a job" cost you 10 years. I am dubious of that assertion. If you were writing even for just an hour a day for 10 years, that should mean you wrote between 1,780,000 and 890,000 words, or in other word, 18-9 books of average length. I find it hard to believe that such productivity was a waste.

Preposterous. The reasons I say this are two. First, the book has already been approved. It has been approved by other professionals who have used it in their classrooms. It has been approved by the historical significance of the book itself. It has been approved by its literary merit. Why should it need to be re-approved? Second, since it has already been approved by professionals, the only people left who could approve it anew are non-professionals. That is akin to having other patients approve a doctor's diagnosis before she can give it to her own patient. Such actions harm the educational system in general. Professionalization is a necessity for quality, while placing a group under the authority of non-experts deprofessionalizes the field. It is the professionalizing influence of a field that expels the charlatans, snakeoilmen, and the tomfoolery that makes a field untrustworthy. Teacher is already weakly professionalized, largely due to its willingness to take in other professionals, and to allow its own to seek other professions. It is weakened by bloated administrative structures divorced from the actual craft of teaching. It is weakened by ignorant parents seeking haphazardly to enforce their ill founded opinions on the field. Requiring that a book like Ender's Game get reapproved would unnecessarily diminish professional authority and place untrained and unknowledgeable individuals in a position of authority. Now, you noted that teachers and administrators can be absent of common sense. This is true, but irrelevant as all people can be absent of common sense. Teachers aren't infallible, certainly, but until they fall, their training and the approval of their peers has earned them the ability to perform their profession unmolested.

Well Jack, you haven't been shot yet, so good show. I'll go ahead and add the Inheritance Cycle. The first two books were fun enough to justify reading, but I haven't been able to get past the prologue of the last one. So now it is just sitting on my shelf, mocking me. Edit: Also, His Dark Material. The reason for this is that the universe is saved by sex, and we know that god doesn't exist because a nun likes marzipan. Those two sections were so ridiculous that I haven't been able to reread the books. Other than that, the books are rather good. Alas

The ending made me wonder if, perhaps, they were afraid that the second season might get canceled before it airs. It reminded me of other TV shows that have had just enough warning to try to wrap up plots, but not enough time to do it right.

Since we are on the topic of shipping, I am totally hoping that Zuko and Katara will get together this go around (assuming May is out of the way, as well). And clearly, Iroh is going to be a love interest for Lin.

I'd argue that there are two reasons for that. First, as Kurkistan noted, the epilogue was far more blunt about setting things up for the next one. Second, the scope of the book and the characters themselves make us more invested in the future of these specific characters, and thus the problems that they will face, than Elantris did. Actually, the two endings do compare quite nicely, even. Though, this will contain spoilers. Ahem, now, in Elantris the book ends with two tiny nations having survived a sneak attack by an otherwise world-encompassing nation, largely through the use of a nuclear deterrent (that is, Aon'Dor). The story's main villain (Hrathen) has been defeated, but the Big Bad Mastermind (Wyrn Wulfden) is still free and largely unconfronted. While the immediate goals of the book were achieved (preventing invasion, restoring Elantris), the larger problems presented in the text are still there, waiting to be addressed (that is, both tiny nations are still unstable and will have to deal with significant external military pressure). Almost the exact same set up ends AoL. The story's main villain (Miles) has been defeated, but the Big Bad Mastermind (Edwarn) is still free and largely unconfronted. While the immediate goals of the book were achieved (saving Steris), the larger problems presented in the text are still there, waiting to be addressed (that is, the other kidnapped women are still missing, and the secret society is still plotting). The scope of AoL, however, is much smaller. We see a lot more of Wax and Wayne, and so we like them more (indeed, I'd argue that they are also inherently more likeable than the Elantris trio). This means that we care more about their continuing problems. And those specific problems are ones that we can identify with more easily. We have no real clue how Prince/King/GrandPoohba Raoden will go about saving his nation from the big bad Wulfden. But, we have a fairly good idea that saving the other kidnapped women will require Wax to, you know, hunt them down and save them. That is a lot of what AoL itself was about. We can visualize Wax completing this task a lot better than we can visualize Raoden completing his task, hence we care more about Wax's. It's also less abstract (saving specific people v stopping war). In both cases, the plot was wrapped up to the same extent, but we care more about the unresolved threads and the characters of AoL than we do about the unresolved threads and characters of Elantris. Thus, AoL seems to need a sequel more. Not that Elantris was bad, by any means. But Sanderson has had several extra years practice, at this point. We should expect that a more recent book will hook us more than an older one. I don't doubt that his future books will make us want sequels even more.

Sanderson likes to leave his stories somewhat open ended, though. AoL seemed about as wrapped up as, say, Elantris, and Sanderson intended that to be standalone, if need be. Though that said, I'd be far more excited for an AoL sequel than anything else. Wax and Wayne are brilliant characters: I'd be happy just reading about them doing laundry, I'm sure.

AoL is a brilliant book, just of a different type than the first Mistborn trilogy. Those were epic fantasy, AoL is not. That explains why it is also a "shorter" book (although, it is actually full sized: 50-100k words is normal for books): when writing epic fantasy, one has to have friggenly huge books just to build up enough tension and resolve everything. The stakes are smaller, but very satisfying. This book also contains some of the most enjoyable scenes in the mistborn series, both from an entertainment and a craft standpoint. I love the first trilogy, but I was greatly impressed with how much Sanderson has grown as a writer in the "short" time between those and this. It is well worth the full price, but, as Sanderson has said, he's happy that people read his books, so if you want to scrimp and wait until its marked down or at the library, I'm sure he'll still be happy. Just remember, every time you do that, you make old Ironeyes cry... I think... it's kind of hard to tell since he doesn't have tear ducts anymore.

Unfortunately, ever since I saw the trailer I can't help but think of "Hark a Vagrant"'s take on it: http://harkavagrant.com/index.php?id=288

I really hope I wasn't the only one to think "Hey, they made that out of aluminum!"

Or he'd be opening options up to them that they didn't have before. By interfering, Sazed changed the conditions in which the individuals were living. Choices depend on one's circumstances, by changing the circumstances, Sazed could have created more choices than they had before. Think of Sazed the way you might think of higher education. Higher Ed doesn't make people inherently better, but it does give them tools which opens up more opportunities than they had before. Take away higher ed, and people just don't have the same options anymore.

My point being, if he helped neither, then neither may have had the opportunity to make their own choice.