Remaining Shards

[Voidus]

Makes me wonder if Shards fall into the same table as allomancy. Physical and Mental almost surely. Things get odd around Temperal, but it should work fairly well.

JOSH

The Allomantic metals are separated into four quadrants. Do the Shards have classifications as well, in groups of four?

BRANDON SANDERSON

This division, the Allomantic division is a thing researchers and scholars placed upon it.

Not a definite no on that but it seems unlikely. I like Comatose's but I would say that Domination would seem to belong more in the second grouping.

[Zarepath he/him]

Salvation and Damnation

[happyman he/him]

What I notice about the shard intents is that they are mostly noun forms of very active verbs (the exceptions being Odium and Devotion). Ruin ruins, Preservation preserves, Endowment endows, Dominion dominates, Honor honors, etc. While Odium and Devotion are a little less straight forward (Odium hates and/or causes hate, Devotion, presumably, shows devotion by being devoted to something), they are very action based. Their intent forces them to DO something.

Since we are kind of taking shots in the dark here, I think it is useful to keep patterns like this in mind when looking at other shards. So far, all of the shard intents are coupled with actions (most of which are pretty obvious). I would like to assume that the other intents continue this pattern, which is why I'm not sure if things like fear, avarice/greed, and guile work. True, you can attach passive verbs to these (as was done with devotion: Fear is afraid of something, Greed wants more things, etc.) but they don't carry the same 'ooomph' in my opinion of the stronger verbs shown by the shards we know already.

Another important point, I think, when considering shards is how they interact with humanity. All the shards we've seen so far act out their intent in relation to humanity (the exception is Odium, who seems to primarily target other shards). Ruin wants to destroy human life, Preservation wants to preserve it. Endowment endows humans with breath and power. Devotion (if the seons as splinters of Aona's shard are any indication) was unconditionally devoted to humanity, while Dominion seems to want to dominate all of Sel. Would "Fear" be afraid of humans? How would Greed's intent engage with people?

I dunno, I could be totally off base, but that's my gut inclination when I read some of these possibilities. What do you guys think?

I think you've made the first really solid logical point in this entire thread. Maybe we shouldn't use the term "intent." Maybe we should use the term "purpose." All of the Shards have a purpose which drives them.

Edited October 3, 2012 by happyman

[Comatose he/him]

Upon review, I agree that Domination doesn't really fit with the first grouping, however, I'm not sure if it fits with the second grouping either (though I see now that it fits better there than with the first grouping). Here's where we run into problems, since Domination could very well be part of the third of fourth group, but with nothing to compare or contrast it to, we have no way of knowing.

That hasn't stopped us before though .

[Arondell]

Upon review, I agree that Domination doesn't really fit with the first grouping, however, I'm not sure if it fits with the second grouping either (though I see now that it fits better there than with the first grouping).

I must admit as soon as I heard that Dominion was confirmed as the other shard on Sel I always associated it more with nation building and/or governing rather then dominating. Since a "dominion" is usually an area controlled by a sovereign authority of some sort. A potentially very powerful unifying force which if it was willing to work cooperatively with Devotion would have been a formidable opponent from Odium's perspective. Incidentally putting a big red target on them early on.

I'll grant you there can be a fine line between "nation building" and "dominating" however you define them.

[Alonin he/him]

I feel there will be 8 "good" ones and 8 "bad ones.

Good

Honor

Preservation

Devotion

Endowment

Cultivation

?Salvation?

?Order?

Bad

Ruin

Dominion

Odium

?Corruption?

?Damnation?

?Chaos?

Eh, that's all I got for now.

[Windrunner he/him]

Well Chaos should be happy with that promotion

[RenegadeShroom]

Chaos and Order, eh? Almost sounds like Vorlons and Shadows. . .

*Ahem* Anyways, the idea of the sixteen Shards being divided into two groups of eight seems to correlate with Allomancy's basic and higher metals, and it seems logical enough. . . but them being ordered into "bad" and "good" Shards? I disagree there, it seems off somehow. After all, on a wider scale than just humanity, "good" vs "bad" is too abstract, I think. Take Ruin, for example; to him, ruinious things are good and preservative things are bad, no? So whose perception of "good" and "bad" are we working on here?

[Thought]

Perhaps the shards are divided Realmatically? Yes, this would produce uneven groups, but if I am recalling correctly, Sanderson noted at one point that the reason metals is involved in the Metallic Arts (as opposed to commands or breaths or aons or stormlight or whatever) is because Ruin and Preservation were themselves more strongly tied to the physical realm. Alas, can't find the quote, so I might be full of bunk.

If so, then I'd propose something like:

Physical Shards

*Ruin

*Preservation

*Cultivation

*Something Else

*Something Else Still

Cognitive Shards

*Odium

*Honor

*Something Else³

*Something Else Else

*Somethinger Else

*Somethingest Else

Spiritual Shards

*Endowment

*Domination

*Devotion

*Somethingish Other

*Else Something Is

One Shard To Rule Them All, One Shard to Find Them, One Shard to Bring Them All, And In The Cosmere Bind Them

*Steve The Shard

[FlashWrogan he/him]

Earth! Fire! Wind! Water! Heart! Let our powers combine . . . . Oh wait, wrong forum....

[Comatose he/him]

I agree that thee 'good' and 'bad' designations don't quite hold up, especially when you look at what Brandon has done with the Shards. Preservation is a good example, if Preservation existed without ruin, things would never change, which would be bad, they needed each other to create. Also, if you look at them, Ruin is in some ways more honorable than preservation, though he holds a more nefarious intent. Ruin agreed to the bargain when they made humanity and held to it, Preservation is the one who broke his word and double-crossed ruin.

While some shards might seem more moral than others, I do not think good and evil will be the major groupings.

The realmatic groupings are interesting. Out of curiosity, why did you put Honor and Odium in cognitive? They seem more spiritual to me, but that's just a subjective value judgment.

[Thought]

The realmatic groupings are interesting. Out of curiosity, why did you put Honor and Odium in cognitive? They seem more spiritual to me, but that's just a subjective value judgment.

Devotion, Domination, and Endowment all seemed fairly basic, something that even animals (that is, things with a low cognitive presence) would have. Honor and Hatred, however, are relatively abstract concepts that require a good deal of cognition to operate.

So basically, physical=things that can occur without life (like Rust, aka Ruin), spiritual=things that can occur with any life, and cognitive=things that require sentient life.

Just unsubstantiated suppositions, though.

[RenegadeShroom]

So basically, physical=things that can occur without life (like Rust, aka Ruin), spiritual=things that can occur with any life, and cognitive=things that require sentient life.

So then shouldn't Cultivation be a cognitive Shard, then? Cultivation seems pretty exclusive to life I reckon, and I'm not sure why you grouped it under physical.

[Thought]

First, it's not cognitive because, under my baseless groundwork, it's not sentient behavior (although certainly sentient creatures can cultivate land). It's not spiritual, either, because while it is concerned with life, it is really more about making the natural world suitable for life, rather than being something that life itself does. That is, the sun provides energy to a system, thereby enriching it. It also causes water to evaporate, turn into cloud, go over land, and rain, thereby making it more suitable for life. Its a matter of weather and seasons, soil and streams, than else. But it isn't really like we've seen much of Cultivation, so my interpretation of it is entirely baseless.

[Comatose he/him]

I like those definitions, but then I'd say Endowment can't be spiritual, since I'd argue that animals do not have the social capability or understanding to endow, thus I'd argue either it's cognitive (since endowment, the ability to give, to see a need and fill it, I'd argue anyways, is more complex), or physical, since it involves something concrete (the endowment of something to or upon something), though the second doesn't quite fit with your definition of the physical.

[Thought]

Again, most my distinctions are baseless (I do hope I am driving that point home enough), but my reasoning was that Endowment seems close to the social relationships that a number of mammals display (and the parent/child bond that even more creatures have). Look at a dog: it can tell when it's own pups are hungry, when they need to go relieve themselves. It provides them with warmth of its own warmth, food from its body, etc. And, many dogs are aware of their owner's emotional state as well. If you are sad, your dog will likely try to cheer you up. Hence why I went with spiritual. But that is certainly not to say that things are this way, just how I interpret them.

[Wonko the Sane he/him]

I've given this a little thought in the past, but as has been remarked by others, we simply know too few to guess at the rest. However, now that I've told you it's useless to have an opinion on the matter, I'd like to give you mine.

On the "Shard/CounterShard" line of thought, I agree that Devotion would, of the Shards known currently, be the best match for Odium. In the first place, there is the previously mentioned supporting Word of Brandon that, at least in this case, Aona's Shard (Devotion) is a synonym of love. Now, I can understand all the arguments for Honor and others, but honestly, when looking for an antonym to hate, if love is an option, there is little sense in considering much else. Furthermore, the most cogent defense for Honor - a reinterpretation of the meaning of "Odium" from hatred to worthy of hatred - has two fatal flaws: One, such a definition would necessitate a reciprocal meaning for Honor, as "worthy of loyalty." Unfortunately, Honor has not given any indication that this is the case. Rather, he has, as would be predicted by the conventional definition, rewarded any and all honorable actions. The second hole in the idea is simply that "worthy of hatred" does not seem - in my own opinion - to convey the characteristic singularity of purpose found in the other Shards. What sort of decisions would an "Odious" person be inclined to make?

Incidentally, the recategorization of Devotion as love resolves a different issue that I'd been considering: the motivation of Devotion seems too vague. After all isn't Preservation "devoted" to preserving things? If simply being devoted to something were enough, then holding literally any other Shard would put you at the top of the list for Devotion's favored servants. Furthermore, the opposite of devotion would be ambivalence, implying that its Shardholder would have to... fervently not care about things. I'm not exactly sure how you would go about that.

Returning to the topic at hand, I feel that we have too easily allowed ourselves to be duped into thinking that Devotion and Dominion are counterparts, simply because they are on the same Shardworld. While I acknowledge that there is admittedly some friction between their purposes, I do not believe that the two are in direct opposition. I see a much greater enmity between Dominion and Endowment. Endowment is fundamentally oriented toward giving indiscriminately, relinquishing its power wherever it can. Dominion, on the other hand, is about conquest and acquisition, seizing and taking control of anything and everything. These two - giving and taking - seem to be fairly contradictory to me. Furthermore, this means that Devotion must needs look elsewhere for a match... See above.

Based on the completely indefensible assumption that each Shard must have a polar opposite, I have done my best to throw together the following:

Preservation vs. Ruin

Odium vs. Devotion

Endowment vs. Dominion

Honor vs. Deception/Treachery/Corruption/Treason/Cowardice/etc.

Unfortunately, Cultivation's name, out of context, tells us frustratingly little that can actually be trusted. She could stand for anything from life and the boundless growth of nature to the chaining of nature and the progress of civilization. As such, I do not feel confident enough to speculate as to her opposite.

Lastly, I would like to affirm the conviction that in a world this complex, it hardly seems likely that these Shards are simply a random collection of attributes. In fact, I would like to take the notion even further. I feel that Brandon, with his notorious reputation for complex, yet somehow beautifully unified worldbuilding, would not settle for simply sorting the Shards into a number of (in many of the above theories, pretty much arbitrary) categories. It seems far more probable that each individual Shard was chosen very carefully as a true, elemental aspect of reality, such that when taken as a whole, they take on a unified centrality. I'm not sure that the way I worded that will make sense to be anyone but me, so consider the following analogy: I feel that it is far more likely that the Shards would be Red, Blue, and Yellow, as opposed to a random assortment of Green, Yelllow, and Purple or a loosely categorized system of Red with Orange and Blue with Purple. In a sense, I'm saying that even the most rigorous systems suggested so far seem a little too haphazardly put together for Brandon. (Also, the color theory referenced in this analogy is unfounded, simplistic, and extremely outdated. However, despite all of this, it is almost invariably still taught in public elementary schools, so it made a useful bit of common ground upon which to base my explanation. Please do not perpetuate its academic use.)

Edited November 7, 2012 by Wonko the Sane

[ustus]

Hey, new to the forum (found it yesterday from the wiki, which I was reading from curiosity) and I'm flipping through this section to get a feel for what's going on in this background story. I've missed a lot of this (though I've only gotten to a second read of WoK so far) so take my observations with a grain of salt. I just saw the previous post and something about this stuck out to me:

Based on the completely indefensible assumption that each Shard must have a polar opposite, I have done my best to throw together the following:

Preservation vs. Ruin

Odium vs. Devotion

Endowment vs. Dominion

Honor vs. Deception/Treachery/Corruption/Treason/Cowardice/etc.

Apologies for not figuring out how to quote yet (probably html). But anyway, on to the observation itself

Preservation (female) vs ruin (male)

Odium (male) vs devotion (female)

Endowment (???) Vs dominion (male)

Honor (male) vs ??? (???)

Now, I seem to remember seeing a quote somewhere about not all shards being paired, but if that's not the case and this pairing is correct (which I personally think this pairing seems logical) we may have a gender for endowment, and if we can find a pattern for gender / intent pairing, that may give us hints at what shards would be paired with honor or cultivation.

Darn it, I felt like there was so much more information there before I typed it out. Either way, I think I'll start trying to join discussions here and see if I can see the overarching plot a bit better now.

[Nepene he/him]

Brandon has said all shards are not paired. I would assume that god only has godly attributes. He doesn't have shame or guilt, the opposite of honor.

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/121.45?lang=eng

Reading through these for interesting ones that haven't come up yet...

Suffering. Jesus sufferred with us. Perhaps this world where people get diseases and then get magic has suffering on it?

Knowledge. Finally a god where you can learn magic by studying?

Holiness. Purity, free from sin, free from taint. I can imagine this would present some interesting features for an empire of religious people, though I believe Mormonism may not believe in this as strongly.

Righteousness. A just god? Brandon can have an overarching religion of justice and he can have a police agent to track and annoy the hero. Les Miserables anyone?

Truth. A god that was powered by truth and always sought the truth?

My own thoughts, God is a jealous god.

Jealousy. A magic you get through jealousy? That would be quirky.

Death. Always a part of god, along with life.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishnu

This is probably where preservation and ruin came from. The man balanced between them held both.

Edited November 19, 2012 by Nepene

[Morsk he/him]

I have a hard time analogizing Adonalsium to the God of the Abrahamic religions. The Shards are way too weak to be 1/16th of something that created all space and time. Their inability to access the afterlife also makes them feel less than godlike.

I do think there's a God in the cosmere, but that Adonalsium is just a tool it created for a task, then chose to leave around after the task was done. So it's called "the power of creation" because it was used for some creative task, not because it's all the power the creator God had available. Ruin and Odium can be part of creation, because artists and designers make judgements about what to avoid or get rid of as part of the creative process.

Anything that could be involved in creation, I think might show up as a Shard. Brandon is an artist himself, so he's an expert! But I don't expect to see strictly religious shards like Holiness. Maybe something like Diligence, if that's not already a part of Honor or Devotion.

[Nepene he/him]

I have a hard time analogizing Adonalsium to the God of the Abrahamic religions. The Shards are way too weak to be 1/16th of something that created all space and time. Their inability to access the afterlife also makes them feel less than godlike.

I do think there's a God in the cosmere, but that Adonalsium is just a tool it created for a task, then chose to leave around after the task was done. So it's called "the power of creation" because it was used for some creative task, not because it's all the power the creator God had available. Ruin and Odium can be part of creation, because artists and designers make judgements about what to avoid or get rid of as part of the creative process.

Anything that could be involved in creation, I think might show up as a Shard. Brandon is an artist himself, so he's an expert! But I don't expect to see strictly religious shards like Holiness. Maybe something like Diligence, if that's not already a part of Honor or Devotion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exaltation_%28LDS_Church%29

Exaltation or Eternal Life is a belief among members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) that mankind can return to live in God's presence and continue as families.[1] Exaltation often referred to as being a more literal belief in both the ancient and modern Christian doctrine of deification or divinization. Exaltation is often referred to in Mormon Christianity as "eternal progression" and is believed to be what God desires for all humankind. The LDS Church teaches that, through the atonement of Jesus Christ, believers may become joint-heirs with Jesus Christ.[2] The objective of adherents is to strive for purity and righteousness and to become one with Jesus as Jesus is one with the Father (God).[3] In the Doctrine and Covenants is found a verse that states that those who are exalted will become like god and, thus, will inherit God's glory through Christ's atonement.[4]

When reading him it's helpful to remember that he views men becoming gods as one of the greatest gifts God can give them. They would presumably have limited if massive power in the Cosmere.

[happyman he/him]

As an actual Mormon, I would add to this conversation that most Mormon's view God as being much more powerful than any of the shards or gods shown in Brandon's fiction. Although there are and will probably continue to be philosophical discussions about how powerful He is, the debate floats around the definition of what Omnipotent means, exactly. Although Humans being deified means being given "all that the Father hath," the assumption is that anyone who gets to that point will be exactly as in control as God is, and will be beholden to Him. But that's speculation.

In short, the Cosmere is fiction even for a Mormon. Some themes are related, but they are different as well. People read too much into his religion to find out about his cosmology.

[Yados]

I have a hard time analogizing Adonalsium to the God of the Abrahamic religions. The Shards are way too weak to be 1/16th of something that created all space and time. Their inability to access the afterlife also makes them feel less than godlike.

I do think there's a God in the cosmere, but that Adonalsium is just a tool it created for a task, then chose to leave around after the task was done. So it's called "the power of creation" because it was used for some creative task, not because it's all the power the creator God had available. Ruin and Odium can be part of creation, because artists and designers make judgements about what to avoid or get rid of as part of the creative process.

Anything that could be involved in creation, I think might show up as a Shard. Brandon is an artist himself, so he's an expert! But I don't expect to see strictly religious shards like Holiness. Maybe something like Diligence, if that's not already a part of Honor or Devotion.

Well, if there's an abrahamic god in the cosmere, it's kind of irrelevant, isn't it?

I mean, maybe this is my atheism (which is really more of a shrugging agnosticism than a shining principle) talking, but it seems if there's a god and it's working indirectly through a bunch or physical and metaphysical forces in a way that people don't notice... and there doesn't seem to be a cost to them not noticing... it might as well not be there. You could just call it physics and it would be the same general idea.

Conversely, we have the Shards, which do directly impact the Shardworlds, but never seem very worthy of worship once we, the reader, see them for what they are. Most that we've seen are evil, impotent, or dead. Belief in the Shards themselves does nothing beyond providing in-world characters with the knowledge that these Shards may be able to impact the in-world events.

Even Sazed's spiritual revelation in HoA read to me like a more utilitarian justification of religion that transcended its actual validity. What swayed Sazed toward believing was that people who believed in their religions tended to be happier? It rang a little false for me, subsequent events aside.

I'm aware of Sanderson's religion, but the Cosmere books themselves have always read to me as something less spiritually concrete than anything an organized religion would put out as doctrine.

The Cosmere: "God is dead, so let's all be secular humanists in a world that happens to also contain the supernatural to varying degrees of effectiveness and intent"

Edited November 19, 2012 by Yados

[Morsk he/him]

Well, if there's an abrahamic god in the cosmere, it's kind of irrelevant, isn't it?

I mean, maybe this is my atheism (which is really more of a shrugging agnosticism than a shining principle) talking, but it seems if there's a god and it's working indirectly through a bunch or physical and metaphysical forces in a way that people don't notice... and there doesn't seem to be a cost to them not noticing... it might as well not be there. You could just call it physics and it would be the same general idea.

I feel the same way, and about everything you wrote; I just don't want to quote the whole thing. But I think the Elantris Chapter 62-2 Annotation reveals a case of divine intervention by something beyond the Shards. So I try to include that in my explanations of what Adonalsium was, although it's not necessary. Even given that there's some type of deity beyond the Shards, Adonalsium doesn't have to be related to it. It could be a high-tech artifact created by an ancient civilization, with advanced knowledge of Realmatics.

"Power of creation" makes me want to associate it with that deity beyond the Shards though. That doesn't feel like the right name for a high-tech magic artifact. Even a terraforming device, I don't think would get called "the power of creation", unless people were being really poetic.

[Yados]

I feel the same way, and about everything you wrote; I just don't want to quote the whole thing. But I think the Elantris Chapter 62-2 Annotation reveals a case of divine intervention by something beyond the Shards. So I try to include that in my explanations of what Adonalsium was, although it's not necessary. Even given that there's some type of deity beyond the Shards, Adonalsium doesn't have to be related to it. It could be a high-tech artifact created by an ancient civilization, with advanced knowledge of Realmatics.

"Power of creation" makes me want to associate it with that deity beyond the Shards though. That doesn't feel like the right name for a high-tech magic artifact. Even a terraforming device, I don't think would get called "the power of creation", unless people were being really poetic.

I knew about that Elantris bit. It doesn't *necessarily* mean there's a power beyond the Shards. It could mean that we don't know wholly how Splintered shards like Devotion or Dominion work or if there's still some aspect of them that can direct the main world or use of their powers.

Certainly the terminology used in the annotation isn't any more confirmation of an Abrhamic god than it is a proto-explanation of the Shards.

I mean, these annotations were written well before Hero of Ages was published, yeah? Did readers even know about things like Adonalsium or Devotion? From that perspective, an intelligence behind the magic wouldn't have terminology to fit it beyond "providence". It could mean Shardic intervention much like Preservation snapping mistings and working Atium into the 16.