A thought has occurred to me. And perhaps even a solution. From what we have been told it seems, to me, that the universe has, over time, become more and more complex. With more and more powers, and entities related to those powers. And from what I have learnt, the balance between all of these powers seems to have been maintained, at least while it lasted, by pairs and groups of powers, each countering, balancing and recycling the effects of the others.
As the powers are each, essentially, living things, this sounds, to me, analogous to a very basic sort of ecology - the interrelationships of organisms with their environment and each other. Or even analogous to the homeostasis that maintains living creatures.
In this ecology the powers are equivalent to species and the entities possessing the powers equivalent to members of that species. The balancing is thus an attempt to maintain the stability of the ecosystem as a whole. However, from what I know of the subject, an ecology with such a small number of 'species' and a small number of members of each species is intrinsically unstable, and very easy to upset.
In addition to this, it appears that there is a fundamental contradiction - a fundamental flaw - in the very heart of all of the versions of the universe so far created. That is, the conflict between stability and dynamism.
From what has been stated, if the universe becomes too static, too stable, then the Mother and the Father will deem it a failure and recreate it. Out of boredom perhaps? However, if it is too dynamic, then the products of that dynamism - us - will inevitably damage the universe and cause it to be recreated anyway. This is a problem I think we must address in any solution we may come up with.
It seems to me that the incremental approach to universal stabilisation used so far simply does not, at its heart, work in the long term. More and more involved attempts to stabilise the fundamentally unstable rather than to address the fundamental flaw in the universe as a whole are not, in my opinion, the way forward.
Of course, the question is, will the Mother and the Father - do the Mother and the Father - see this? And if so, do they see it as a problem?
To me all of this implies that, perhaps, we need to remake the universe into something different to anything that has been tried before. A true, stable, evolving ecology of powers and entities. Increase the number of powers and so on greatly so that no one power is sufficient to undo or destabilise the whole. Link everything together so that everyone has an investment in the 'ecosystem' as a whole and thus acts as checks and balances on everyone else.
If nothing else we should, perhaps, create more of the same powers. For the same reasons. Where one of each may become unbalanced, I suspect many of each would be considerably more stable. As long as there was sufficient variation between each instantiation of the power, of course.
Perhaps every shadow should have its own intrinsic power or powers? There is a certain logic to that. Why should only some folk be privileged to possess powers such as ours? Why should only we decide the future of the universe, and be able to fight effectively for it? It is their universe to! Let them have a say in its future!
I am not sure whether this rearrangement idea would imply a vast increase in the number of groups and entities at our level of power, or a decrease in everyone's level of power as the same resources became spread much more widely. Either might work, although obviously I prefer the former.
In either case we will all lose much of our 'special' status in the universe, but I, at least, can most certainly live with that.
At its heart, it seems to me that this plan requires a rearrangement of the hierarchy of the universe. As I understand it, in the universe as it exists today everything originates and derives from, at its core and however far removed, the fundamental conflict between Everything and Nothing - Yggdrasil and Abyss - the Mother and the Father. Perhaps what is required now is a different point of origin.
From what I have learned, it would seem that Nature and Potential - Balance and Change - would be ideal new candidates for the basis of the new universe. They seem to contain within themselves everything I have described above, and I am sure that, with a little thought, everything else could be rearranged to derive from them rather than Yggdrasil and Abyss. And perhaps a new, and distinct, power of Life, too, would be a good addition to the universe.
But as ever, of course, everything depends on whether Yggdrasil and Abyss are willing to give up their place as foundations of the universe. Is the universe their child, that they will let grow as it may, or their toy, over which they wish to retain control?
I am not sure that the creation of a new 'Elder Empire' run by the Children of the Primal Beings is, despite Abyss' preference for it, a way forward. Reducing the number of great powers in the universe, even for short-term gain, means little if such an act, in the end, leads to long-term problems that could have been avoided by a little more thought at this early stage.
If we accept the concept of a functioning ecology of powers as the way forward then we also, I think, need to accept the reality of change being intrinsic to the system as a whole. Not try and limit the dynamism of the inhabitants of the universe, as, it seems, such an attempt will inevitably fail in one way or another. Instead we and the universe should embrace that dynamism. Accept that Powers, entities and shadows should, and will evolve, change (sometimes in un-recognisability), interact with other powers to spawn new ones, heal if damaged, mutate, and, yes, even die out entirely. We need stability out of dynamism rather than in opposition to it.
From what the Father has said that should be entirely possible, if 'all' that is currently needed is to form concepts into a single core and then grant life to that, creating a new being then can then shape a power from that outlook. Surely that can be modified into the more dynamic form I think is necessary.
All of the things that occur in stable biological ecosystems should occur here too, at least in analogy. And most importantly, all without having to further rewrite the universe to let it be so. In particular giving shadows, powers and so on the ability to heal themselves and perhaps even learn in a reflexive manner.
We need to accept that change, growth, and even death on a local level are necessary for stability on a universal level. And thus that the new universe requires enough variety, adaptability and resilience for the system as a whole to be able to cope with anything, whether it should arise internally or externally. To cope with any change without having to be rewritten every so often. To allow it to be stable in its dynamism, rather than stable in opposition to its dynamism, something that seems, from history, to be inevitably doomed to failure.
We have to accept the fact that things will change, and that there is nothing we can do about this. That unpredictable things will happen, and that the unexpected is lurking in the woodwork, and will leap out when least expected, and probably least convenient. That there are things we simply cannot foresee, or control.
As part of this I believe that things - powers, entities and shadows - everything - should mutate, spontaneously, but also slowly, so that even if things should settle to an entirely stable state eventually enough mutations will accumulate to drive the system out of that state into something more dynamic.
Perhaps, above everything else, there should also be a regulating entity to maintain the 'ecosystem' as a whole. What might, in some shadows, be called 'Gaea'. That, here, would probably be the Mother and the Father.
Or perhaps there should not be such a being. Perhaps the 'ecology of powers' should be made self-regulating if such is possible.
I admit that I prefer the latter option. The former strikes too much of reverting to the old system of a small number of powers, with all that its intrinsic imbalance implies.
Of course, all of this depends on how much control the Father and the Mother are willing to give up in this process. If any. To recreate the universe - their largest and most unruly child - into as optimal a new form as possible. If they are not willing to lose control, then this entire idea is aborted before it even begins...
But, the only alternative to this that I can see is to consolidate everything back into one, something stable and unchanging.
I am certainly not in favour of this idea. And from what the Father has said, it is also not an option that is acceptable to Him and the Mother, either.
One question that does occur is upon what level will this change and evolution take place? Should it be from generation to generation, in what might be called a 'Darwinian' manner? Or would adaptation of individuals, while they live, with the adaptations also being passed to any children, be a better option? What might be called 'Lamarckian' evolution?
Personally, I think the latter is a better option, although it might be disconcerting for the individuals involved. I know that I, for one, would most certainly not want to be left behind by evolution...
I suggest that we should create a 'seed stock' of powers, entities and groups based on and expanding from the current ones, out from which the entire ecology of powers would then grow and diversify. In the same manner that numbers and diversity will grow in a population of species released into a new set of environments. And this should, in my opinion, include entities such as Cerebaton and Anntha.
I can see that it might be a challenge to persuade the others that this is the best way forward. But still, if I can, think what an adventure it will be!