Wheel of time

[TheAlmightyOne]

Picked up new spring the other day seeing as I've finished all the others. Now its a great book series and is my favourite thing on paper. However I also like to complain and so complain I shall. Firstly, new spring. Its so far been 1 chapter with Lan doing something cool and 6 chapters of name writing fun. Not to mention the anti-climax of looking for Rand even though I know hes on his way to the two rivers. Luckily Moiranes about to be tested for the shawl so something may actually happen now. Secondly book 10, crossroads of twilight, is the worst book ive ever read. I feel like I wasted my life reading 800 pages of 'lets stand around discussing the events of the previous book and planning for events in the next one. Hold on dont forget not to include Rand and have lots of boring political tlaks. But you know what, just to make something happen lets have one paragraph where someone puts a bag over Egwenes head'. Rant over. Just needed it out of my system. Thank you.

[SteveD]

I'm impressed you made it as far as book 10.

The first was great (even if a shameless LotR rip-off), the second was good, and the third was ok. But from there...

...the bad guys became little more then plot devices. The action was dull and repetitive. The story was drawn out to stupid proportions, and steadily less happens in each book. Even the most minor characters are written back into the story. Anyone would think Robert Jordon had discovered a cash-cow in the fantasy market, and was milking it for all its worth.

For a eleven (or twelfth?) book series, if you strip down the fluff you could probably fit it into six or seven books.

[TheAlmightyOne]

I completly agree that the bokos are huge. However its the attention to detail that is what makes the books so interesting. Howevre the bad guys are actually highly complex as you get later into the books. New evil factions start to pop up everywhere. Each with their own agendas. Also I read it and didnt think it was a lord of the rings rip off at all. 'Here small hobbit go destroy this ring' and 'you three kids were born with special powers and youre destined to pretty much destroy our entire world in some uber huge battle'. Yes real similar plotlines there. I found eragon kinda stole alot from WoT. However I did enjoy the Eragon books, although when I saw the film part of me died.

[Om]

The politics of the world are interesting but that doesn't excuse the snail's pace at which the story progresses.

[TheAlmightyOne]

Im sorry but I disagree with you there. The politics of wheel of time are not interesting. In fact Im fairly sure Robret Jordan agrees with me as he decided to put a civil war in there just so people had something to do. Also the politics just added a whole bunch of new characters and these pointless characters just arent dying off quick enough.

[Gygaxphobia]

The reason that things 'pop up everywhere' is that Jordan makes the stuff up as he goes along.
He doesn't have any sort of over-arching plot or long-term plan, except to keep the diaorrhea leaking for as long as possible.
The characters are flat 2d fakes, with no real personality and no possibility of changing or maturing.
They are indeed "three kids were born with special powers and youre destined to pretty much destroy our entire world in some uber huge battle'" yet they still act and talk as if they were 5-years old on a country farm.

Massive rip-offs of multiple authors (Tolkien, Herbert, Gemmell) are the least of my concerns. Seriously I lose faith in humaity's intelligence everytime someone says they enjoyed it past book 3.

Please, please please pease see through the charade for your own sake.

How many times must the threatened apocalyptic ending never come???!!!!!

(yes, this does deserves multiple punctuation)

[Logos7]

Yeah not seeing the LotR ripp off here ( The whole first section (ie getting out of two rivers) yeah but he's already said he was trying for that. The Shameless contrivences of working in minor characters into backstories. Why it's almost as if this world was a peice of tapestry created by a benevolent creator, oh wait it is. It's Pulp in a lot of places, which ought to be expected considering the other things jordan's worked on, and the pacing can be terriblel ( Like Three Books for faile right?) but again i like to think of this as Fantasy Opera and that's what you get.

the Last book i liked, its a build up and working with the enemy's enemy kinda thing. still pacing is a bit lack lustre in places.

It's not High Fantasy (IMO ) and i think that's what all the hate is about, that and every 2 bit gum shoe is a critique nowa days.

Anyway here's look to you ( Kid of light )

Logos

[TheAlmightyOne]

of course hes making it up. None of this ever happened. If you continue reading past book three you'll find that Jordan has developed his own unique style of writing. he may draw on elements of other writing styles but by saying that he actually steals the ideas and then insult them arent you in fact insulting the very books you claim to be defending. I found boks 9 and 11 the best books in the series. The characters do not act like five year old farm boys. And if you think they do I would really love to see the five year old farmboy you have locked up that is able to lead tiny armies against innumerable odds and stil win not by a deus ex machina copout but my statagies and planning. a five year old who can communicate with wolves and also go on a rampage with a hammer and destroy an entire army of near invincible warriora and of course the five year old you controls more than half the known world. Please show me these five year olds cos they sound like they could stand to make alot of money.

[Gygaxphobia]

but again i like to think of this as Fantasy Opera and that's what you get.

fantasy soap opera maybe, it's tripe comparable to Days of Our Lives.


It's not High Fantasy (IMO ) and i think that's what all the hate is about,

it's definately trying to be high fantasy, please look up the definition of that and explain why you think it's not...

the hate is about the appalling authorship, not much else.


that and every 2 bit gum shoe is a critique nowa days.

not sure who you're trying to insult there, but considering your own woeful spelling and grammar maybe you're the perfect market for the books? congrats on reading all the way to #12 !

[TheAlmightyOne]

[QUOTE=Gygaxphobia;2714168]
The characters are flat 2d fakes, with no real personality and no possibility of changing or maturing.
[QUOTE]

Are we reading the same book. The whole focal point of most of it is how theyve been forced to change form innocent country kids into saving the world.

[TheAlmightyOne]

congrats on reading all the way to #12 !

you read book 12? Thats amazing seeing as its not written yet.

[Gygaxphobia]

The characters are flat 2d fakes, with no real personality and no possibility of changing or maturing.
Are we reading the same book. The whole focal point of most of it is how theyve been forced to change form innocent country kids into saving the world.

We clearly aren't reading the same book, I like to read erudite and worthwhile fiction.
Is Nynaeve still tugging her braid and getting angry at everyone? Is Egwene still talking to Rand like he's her little brother?
Maybe he finally ditched that cliched piffle after 10 books, but it was still going when I picked up book 5.


you read book 12? Thats amazing seeing as its not written yet.

I never said that. My mistake if he's only managed to get to book 10 or so.

Maybe if you read more carefully you would see what I wrote, and also realise what appalling crap Jordan is writing? ;)

[TheAlmightyOne]

he has written up to book 11 + a prequel. If you not only read my posts but the books yourself you wouldnt think they were crap. You have shown you havnt even read them so how can yousay that all the books are crap. Going on that logic Im now going to assume everyone in the world is chinese because a chinese person just walked past my window.

[Rumda]

I never said that. My mistake if he's only managed to get to book 10 or so.

Maybe if you read more carefully you would see what I wrote, and also realise what appalling crap Jordan is writing? ;)
If you don't like his writing style then don't read it, and if your going to flame everyone who says different without offering anything to back up your points then you should avoid posting on threads like this.

[TheAlmightyOne]

Is Nynaeve still tugging her braid and getting angry at everyone? Is Egwene still talking to Rand like he's her little brother?
Maybe he finally ditched that cliched piffle after 10 books, but it was still going when I picked up book 5.


Wow. You noticed that characters have character traights. Go you. And actually ever since Nynaeve got married to Lan and was raised she hasnt been yelling at everyone. And seeing as Egwene is Amyrilan and rand is the dragon reborn I think they look at each other as important political leaders and not as brother and sister anymore because THEY HAVE CHANGED EMOTIONALLY.

[Gygaxphobia]

the thread started with serious critiscism, now you're complainig about mine, laughable!


Secondly book 10, crossroads of twilight, is the worst book ive ever read.
etc.

Terrible when someone doesn't agree with you isn't it?
There's plenty of points I've made to back up what I'm saying, ignore them if you like.


Wow. You noticed that characters have character traights. Go you.

oh yes, sarcasm for ftw. Learn to spell "traits" and you might get a Nobel one day. Those "traights"[sic] are precisely the 2d characterisation I was talking about.

[Gygaxphobia]

of course hes making it up. None of this ever happened. If you continue reading past book three you'll find that Jordan has developed his own unique style of writing. he may draw on elements of other writing styles but by saying that he actually steals the ideas and then insult them arent you in fact insulting the very books you claim to be defending. I found boks 9 and 11 the best books in the series. The characters do not act like five year old farm boys. And if you think they do I would really love to see the five year old farmboy you have locked up that is able to lead tiny armies against innumerable odds and stil win not by a deus ex machina copout but my statagies and planning. a five year old who can communicate with wolves and also go on a rampage with a hammer and destroy an entire army of near invincible warriora and of course the five year old you controls more than half the known world. Please show me these five year olds cos they sound like they could stand to make alot of money.

omg I missed this. Please ignore everything I said, I didn't realise who I was talking too.

[TheAlmightyOne]

Ah yes. Because fan critisism is exactly the same as insulting the series. And oh no! You have insulted my lack of dictionary! I am mortally wounded. Also how hipocritical. You call me a hipocrite and insult my spelling while you make a grammar mistake. sarcasm for ftw = sarcasm for for the win. This was intended as a gathering of fans to discuss the good and bad points of the series. Not someone coming in saying 'Ive barely read the books so Im going to insult all of them because Im too lazt to read a long book'. Very very nice.

[TheAlmightyOne]

omg I missed this. Please ignore everything I said, I didn't realise who I was talking too.

errr...quite. Not sure if youre being sarcastic or not (and if you are I dont get it) but erm, ok. I am me and apparently thats an arguement.

[Don Beegles]

I'm going to make an effort to have a debate with you, Almighty, based on what you've said, not my own infallible sense of what is correct and what is incorrect.


of course hes making it up. None of this ever happened
THat's not what he meant. He meant he's making it up as he goes along, which is any entirely different thing. For instance, George R.R. Martin rights about things that have also never happened using intricate plots and characters, but he knows more or less how the series will play out now, rather than just writing to see what will happen. Now, that can have merits if the plot is kept relatively simple, but if you have so much going on, and you don't try to keep track of things, it will come out looking sloppy and full of plot holes.


he may draw on elements of other writing styles but by saying that he actually steals the ideas and then insult them arent you in fact insulting he very books you claim to be defending.
That's also not necessarily true. I think the main idea that Jordan stole from Tolkien is the idea that a group of fairly ordinary people must go out and save the world. Now, that's been stolen by other people too, and it didn't originate with Tolkien, but he certainly popularized it and made it the standard for all mainstream fantasy. And he did it well; there was a set goal that needed to be acheived , and when it was the characters were done and could return home. Most of the excitement in it was that the quest was so unique and all the characters wanted to do was go home. With WoT it's very different; he seems to think that he needs a epic quest in every book to keep the characters occupied. And because he's written so many books, he does need one in every book. The trouble is that with so many epic quests, they are no longer epic, and he needs to ramp up the power in every one until they are just stupid. What book is it where Rand and his about five men kill millions of Trollocs singlehanddely without being strained really at all? That conflict always summarizes it for me; it should be an epic battle that's truly exciting, but for Rand with his great powers, it's really unimpressive because you know he'll win. That's why you can criticize him for using Tolkien's (and many before him) device without criticizing them. They all used the device masterfully, whereas Jordan is amateurish.


The characters do not act like five year old farm boys.<snip>Please show me these five year olds cos they sound like they could stand to make alot of money
You see, the trouble is that these feats they accompliosh has nothing to do with how they act and their intellectual maturity. And using Mat and Perrin as two of three examples is fairly wrong, because I think that they are quite possibly two out of maybe five of his two hundred 'important' characters that are truly realistic. Rand on the other hand, despite seemingly endless powers, still has trouble talking to girls. I know that you'll argue that that is realistic, because he's just a teenager, but he's not a teenager. He has several multiple personalieties that constantly argue with him, all of which are fairly old and experienced. STill though, he seems unable to choose between Min and Elain, what gives? It may have been hyperbole to say he acts like a five year old, but a prepubescent girl may have been an accurate descriptor. I mean, just look at Min and Elaine; they are both so obsessed with him that they're willing to share him with another woman, which means that Rand will have two beautiful women crawling all over him. Add that to infinite powers, and control over the whole world, and we have Rand's real problem: he's the quintessential Mary Sue. You can tell that Jordan is just playing out his innermost fantasies through his protagonist, and while that might make for good masturbation thoughts, it reads like vomit in a book.


You call me a hipocrite and insult my spelling while you make a grammar mistake. sarcasm for ftw = sarcasm for for the win.
I hate to break it to you, but it's an scientfic fact that every criticism of someone's spelling or grammar will have a spelling or grammar mistake. It's called Skitt's law. :smallwink:


Not someone coming in saying 'Ive barely read the books so Im going to insult all of them because Im too lazt to read a long book'.
As far as I could tell, before Gygaxphobia broke down to ad hominem attacks, he was only arguing based on what he'd read. He said "In book five, things were thus, maybe they've changed." And it's stooping more or less to his level to say that he's too lazy to read a long book when in reality he really just didn't read a book he wouldn't enjoy. I skipped long portions of Moby ****, does that make me lazy? No, it just means that I only read things that will enlighten me or I will enjoy, and Melville had neither of these for me. Similarly, Jordan just didn't work for Gygax.

I want to close by saying that I don't think the series was a complete bust. I loved the first three books, and the first six or seven were passable. Unfortunately, there were five more after that. IN the beginning, all of the faults were minimal, but just like in navigation where a .1o error can be magnified over a hundred miles, the little things a write does wrong become much more noticeable by around the eighth book in a long series.

[TheAlmightyOne]

1) I know but he does have the end of the books in mind. in fact its all about it leading up to the end of the world final battle in the last book.

2) ordinary people? yes because i can shoot fire from my hands. also when rand faced the 5 million trollocs it wasnt with 5 men. it was actually with a small army, many of whom died. rand then passed out from exhaustion

3) Read the books. Rand gets over his fear of girls showing an mental maturity and has now taken Min, Elayne and Avienda as his lovers. In fact Elayne is now pregnant.

4)yes but hipocrism inside hipocrism is really annoying

5) yes. yes it does make you lazy as you couldnt be bothered with the whole book

6) thank you for actually making constructive points and not just being a melodramatic idiot who makes the rest of the human race look like monkeys. I enjoy arguments with intelligent people (yes i am insulting you Gygaxphobia)

[Don Beegles]

1) Well, yes, maybe he has the end of the series in mind, but he doesn't seem to be working to get there. He doesn't know exactly what he's doing before he does it, which is why he has opened so many plots. I always get the feeling that as he writes he thinks "Wouldn't it be cool if..." which is fine if he knew how he was going to wrap up each of his dozens of plot in order to get to that final battle, but he seems to only have realized that he needs to actually provide some closure in the middle of the penultimate book, which is not enough time to close 10 books worth of unresolved plots. If he had known more or less how things were going to work from the beginning, it wouldn't be so much of a problem.

2) That's exactly the point I'm making about how he is using the literary technique wrong. When Rand started, he couldn't do anything, and you could empathize with his desire to figure out what was going on and reach the Eye of the World safely. If it had stopped soon after that, it would have been a great series. Now, however, Rand is suffereing from power inflation so he needs huge challenges, and he still meets them fairly easily. Any small army that can defeat 5 million enemies that are stronger than any human and not be completely destroyed in the process is way too strong. Rand is too powerful for any challege to be really interesting. The best comparison I can make is with Epic level magic in DnD; no physical challenge can be fun when the PCs can just cast HellBall or Pinned to the Sky and be done with it. I understand why Jordan would need to make Rand more powerful to top the excitement of each previous adventure, but if he had just stopped after the first few, there would be no need to make his protagonist so powerful that it is no longer exciting.

3)I realized in the middle of my justification of how Rand acts like a 5 year old that that is not really the problem. It is that he is as much a Mary Sue (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Sue) as Eragon. I mean, it's every guy's dream to have three lovers, be invincible, and be the saviour of the world, and JOrdan is really just living through Rand. The argument that Rand doesn't have anything because he's really unhappy is faulty because it just means that RJ is also falling into the Drizzt trap of making God-like characters who still have human angst and depression, which isn't as realistic as he seems to think. It's mostly annoying.

4)That was really just intended as tongue-in-cheek. Skitt's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skitt%27s_Law) is an Internet meme like Godwin's law or Sturgeon's Revelation.

5) You are too lazy to read a long book if you simply can't be bothered to put the effort that it would require, essentially you wouldn't read it if there is no good reason to read it. If you find it a horrible book that is actually 'painful' to read because of the author's techniuque, if there's a good reason not to read it, then you're not being lazy, you're just making a judgment based on your values. I never plan on reading Euclid, but that doesn't mean I'm lazy, it just means I know I wouldn't enjoy reading about geometry, and it wouldn't overly enrich my life.

6)I enjoy arguing with you as well, but you go too far in this last bit. When you openly insult Gygaxphobia, and admit that you are, not only are you stooping to his level, but you're breaking the rules of the website. Not only are ad hominem attacks expressly forbidden, but by acknowledging that you now you're attacking him, I'm fairly certain you're committing a mea culpa offense. I enjoy this debate too much to want it to be locked, so I respectfully ask that both of you keep it civilised.

[Gavin Sage]

I'm going to make an effort to have a debate with you, Almighty, based on what you've said, not my own infallible sense of what is correct and what is incorrect.



THat's not what he meant. He meant he's making it up as he goes along, which is any entirely different thing. For instance, George R.R. Martin rights about things that have also never happened using intricate plots and characters, but he knows more or less how the series will play out now, rather than just writing to see what will happen. Now, that can have merits if the plot is kept relatively simple, but if you have so much going on, and you don't try to keep track of things, it will come out looking sloppy and full of plot holes.

If I'm reading this right then you are basically saying the the Jordan is writing too big and complicated so his work is bound to be full of holes. While I won't say there aren't some errors or oddities, I've read the books from start to finish more times then I care to count and have yet to find significant plotholes.



That's also not necessarily true. I think the main idea that Jordan stole from Tolkien is the idea that a group of fairly ordinary people must go out and save the world. Now, that's been stolen by other people too, and it didn't originate with Tolkien, but he certainly popularized it and made it the standard for all mainstream fantasy. And he did it well; there was a set goal that needed to be acheived , and when it was the characters were done and could return home. Most of the excitement in it was that the quest was so unique and all the characters wanted to do was go home. With WoT it's very different; he seems to think that he needs a epic quest in every book to keep the characters occupied. And because he's written so many books, he does need one in every book. The trouble is that with so many epic quests, they are no longer epic, and he needs to ramp up the power in every one until they are just stupid.

Most of the books have some very big important scenes, but I don't understand so much what the problem is as it just makes the whole that much bigger. I would note the epic quests solved go against the Tolkien trait of achieve one thing and you enemeies quail before you while blowing up as the source of their evil power is gone. There simply is no magic bullet solution in the Wheel of Time, at least on a scale we are used to thinking about.


What book is it where Rand and his about five men kill millions of Trollocs singlehanddely without being strained really at all? That conflict always summarizes it for me; it should be an epic battle that's truly exciting, but for Rand with his great powers, it's really unimpressive because you know he'll win. That's why you can criticize him for using Tolkien's (and many before him) device without criticizing them. They all used the device masterfully, whereas Jordan is amateurish.


Regarding the Knife of Dreams battle you speak of, its not something I would call easy. The simplest channeling is difficult for Rand at the moment. Nor is it millions of Trollocs, its something like 100 thousand which is a mighty force but of sizing that we had already seen in some of Rand's conquests. And it comes after ten books worth of building the scale, nor is it Rand on his own but with something like a dozen channelers. Yes its a bloody slaughter on the Trollocs part, but that's consistent with the power Channelers have period. For comparasion in the first book Moiraine faces hundreds of Trollocs single handily and Agelmar believes just one Aes Sedai could make all the difference at Tarwin's Gap.

The One Power is enourmously powerful but in appilcation its wielders are still ulitmately human. And Jordan uses them and other things to truly make something epic in scope where the mountains shake and its not some barely explained "its magic" explanation or outright gods.


You see, the trouble is that these feats they accompliosh has nothing to do with how they act and their intellectual maturity. And using Mat and Perrin as two of three examples is fairly wrong, because I think that they are quite possibly two out of maybe five of his two hundred 'important' characters that are truly realistic. Rand on the other hand, despite seemingly endless powers, still has trouble talking to girls. I know that you'll argue that that is realistic, because he's just a teenager, but he's not a teenager. He has several multiple personalieties that constantly argue with him, all of which are fairly old and experienced. STill though, he seems unable to choose between Min and Elain, what gives?

You know the whole female trouble thing on Rand's part is resolved right? Rand has come a long way from the rather nervous unsure fellow he once was when just starting out. And if parts are the same then its because he is still human and still has troubles and issues. Nobody likes Mr. Perfect though, especially not as a main character. And Perrin and Mat are there to give the story a mere mortal grounding, which I see more as a connection between the godlike levels of our channelers and such to the normal folk thus improving the story.



It may have been hyperbole to say he acts like a five year old, but a prepubescent girl may have been an accurate descriptor. I mean, just look at Min and Elaine; they are both so obsessed with him that they're willing to share him with another woman, which means that Rand will have two beautiful women crawling all over him. Add that to infinite powers, and control over the whole world, and we have Rand's real problem: he's the quintessential Mary Sue. You can tell that Jordan is just playing out his innermost fantasies through his protagonist, and while that might make for good masturbation thoughts, it reads like vomit in a book.

Which I agree is extremely odd but was well heralded by the Aiel customs well in advance of Rand, Elaine, Min, and Aviendha's compromise. Plus our own world has a long history of polygamy, cross reference with certain Old Testament figures as part of the heroic tradition Rand is fufilling. Nor did Rand simply accept it right off the bat, or any of the girls in question. Another author would have gone for the typical resolution and killed off two of them or otherwise disposed of the conflict. Its contrived but the I for once can simply accept something as part of a story, not to be emulated but far from any sort of "personal fantasy" lemon slash work as they are come off completely different in application. (They'd be more graphic)

As for Mary Sue. That charge I think demonstates the limit of that definition. I once saw a Mary Sue test that the author noted someone like Morpheus from the Neil Gaiman's Sandman scored very high on it. Simply being powerful, even phenomenally powerful is not all there is too being a Mary Sue. Rand has been laid lowed more then once, suffered, done lots of high end stuff but by no mean in quick succession or with ease, nor shrugged everything off without being exhausted or wounded. He may make things look like child's play from the outside, but retains a very human failible core under it and by no means has an easy time of it. Its a critical difference between any immensely powerful/talented character and a true Mary Sue.

Heck I think his most Sueish moment is all the way back in Book 2 against High Lord Turak.


I want to close by saying that I don't think the series was a complete bust. I loved the first three books, and the first six or seven were passable. Unfortunately, there were five more after that. IN the beginning, all of the faults were minimal, but just like in navigation where a .1o error can be magnified over a hundred miles, the little things a write does wrong become much more noticeable by around the eighth book in a long series.

I'll close by saying I don't think the series perfect. There are maybe 2 books too many given how certain plot within them are presented. I think Faile and the Shaido should have been resolved in one book, even if it meant having Perrin not appearing in a second book. And lord knows some of them are a major forced march to get through. And the Aiel as awesome and fun as they are, are Fremen. But at the end of the day I have to give more credit to Rober Jordan for writing an epic that is simply enourmous in scale, yet so intricate and detailed. I can't imagine writing something so huge and can't believe the series only has the comparatively small problems it does.

(And I pray he can somehow finish it, but I've learned slowly to trust in certain authors to do things and Jordan is first on the list)

[TheAlmightyOne]

rebuttal time

1) its all a build up to the last battle and so anything else in between is just Jorden opening and closing plot lines so theres something interesting happening. Making up interesting things in between is alot more interesting than reading 'they sat in the room twiddling their thumbs for a couple of years until everyone got up and randomly started fighting'

2) its all about him being the most powerful being in existance. it wouldnt really work if he was equal with everyone else but had a fancy title and some tatoos.

3) i see your point here. rand does have everything in a normal guys dream but jordan uses the whole wraked with inner turmoil thing to stop him sayin 'screw you im going to have a four-some'

4) yeah i know

5) if you read a book to the end but skip out chapters then yes you are lazy. i was lazy and skipped out the council of elrond chapter when i read LotR. I had no clue who these new charactres were but I was 12. sue me.

6) meh. he had it coming. also i didnt want an intellectual opponant get the wrong idea and then start insulting me cos then i would be bored again

[Lianae]

I'm currently re-reading the books for the second time; I never got around to reading #11 and I thought that I might need a slight refresher on the plot :smallconfused: They definitely go faster on the second time anyway!

The sheer number of subplots and characters does annoy me, especially when they detract from the main story for a long time - which, incidentally, seems to be most of the time. Actually, the thing I dislike most is the prologues which tend to go on for about 100 pages, especially when a chapter is around 30 pages.

That said, though, I do like the books, and like reading them - it's nice to have some not-too-heavy fluff to read at the end of the day, but I do wish RJ would hurry the heck up and finish them!

[TheAlmightyOne]

Apparently the 12th book is coming out in 2009. Also yes, I hated the prologue in book 10 as well. It took me 3 days to read it.

[Dragonrider]

I read the first eleven. And the prologue (which, yes, I didn't care for, either). Towards the last few books, I got frustrated and started skimming, because it was just one battle trumping the last. My aunt put it very well: "The plot starts to thicken! It gets interesting! It gets thicker and thicker! Pretty soon they can't stir it! The plot is now cement!"

I'm probably not going to bother continuing with them. I'd have to re-read them again, because it's been a long time, and I'm not willing to put in that effort.

[J_Muller]

I have to say that I don't quite understand the level of dislike that Wheel of Time gets. It's a great series--one of the first fantasy series I ever read, actually--and I don't regret the experience. While it does drag on recently, I don't at all see the plot-theft and 2d characters that people accuse Jordan of.

That said, I don't intend to read the books he's currently putting out until he's finished the series, at which point I'll read through the whole thing again so that I'll actually know what's going on.


Is Nynaeve still tugging her braid and getting angry at everyone? Is Egwene still talking to Rand like he's her little brother?
Maybe he finally ditched that cliched piffle after 10 books, but it was still going when I picked up book 5.

Congratulations, you've just noticed that characters are characters. Perhaps, when you read Lord of the Rings, you found yourself frowning when Gandalf still acted like a sagacious wizard even in book 3.

[Like a Lion]

Oh, come on. You can have consistent characterization without having the character perform a particular mannerism every over sentence.

Jordan's plotlines are slow and bloated, and his characterization is terrible--the relationships are sixth-grade level. Mat's fun enough, but he's supposed to be.
There's no way for him to wrap it up that would be satisfactory.

Pass Wheel of Time over. Read George R.R. Martin instead, if you like the big long fantasy, or Guy Gavriel Kay for something really beautiful. Or Matt Stover for insightful whoopass.

[Lycurgus]

I happily re-read the whole series every time a new book comes out. The books are moving more slowly because the plots and subplots have continued to subdivide. Be patient and I'm sure they'll clear up. Remember that a lot of these depend on the Forsaken, even the cells of Darkfriends. Yes, the relationships can seem simplistic, but there are much bigger things going on in everyone's lives. I'm sure it's a little difficult to focus on a deep meaningful relationship with your girlfriend when you are a major player in the goings-on of the world where there is constant politicking and backstabbing. Yes, the Aiel are at least partly based on Fremen I'm sure, but the desert hardens people. Look into the tribes of Native Americans from the southwest or the tribes of the Middle Eastern deserts. Lastly, it's obvious that Jordan is drawing on many, many sources in the creation of the Wheel of Time. It's his juxtaposition of all these cultures and ideas with his own twists and turns here and there that makes everything so interesting. Every fantasy world draws on some previous source, and every story can be viewed through the overlay of archetypes. If you feel that the series isn't worth reading, don't read it, but please don't decide that you can tell others what not to read. I'm sure we'd all at least give the series that you suggest a chance, so don't try to prevent others from doing the same.

[Lianae]

While it does drag on recently, I don't at all see the plot-theft and 2d characters that people accuse Jordan of.


Every fantasy world draws on some previous source, and every story can be viewed through the overlay of archetypes.

I agree, there's only so many different 'plots' at the most basic of levels - good vs evil is the most obvious example I can think of, and most books (and pretty much every single fantasy book ever written, I would think) have this on some level or another. And as for the 2-D characters, I wouldn't necessarily agree with that either, but then again, I prefer to read books because I enjoy the story rather than the complexity of characters - but hey, whatever floats your boat!

[CurlyKitGirl]

I'm currently re-reading this series again. It does rather weighty, so I'm glad I've finished school bare aix exams. But this is an amazing series; I wouldn't read it again if I didn't think so. Anyway, yes no. 9 was probably the worst, I had to literally force my way through it. There's a lot of plots, sub-plots, sub-sub-plots but it goes to enrich the story; but for all the God's ever mentioned why are there so many characters appearing for 4/5 chapters for no reason?!?
That was what annoyed me most the first time I started reading them and I occaisionall lost track of who's with who, where and what they're doing, so I think when I've finished bk11 and if thid thread is still going I might list all the characters(major/often recurring) with their own POV to see how many there are.
This series doesn't seserve as much criticism as it gets. The popular J K Rowling has done much worse. Might I tremind you of the teenage angst and the drudgery of book 5. That series went downhill then and though I will buy the last book I won't read it.
Therefore: WoT is better than Harry Potter.

[TheAlmightyOne]

Towards the last few books, I got frustrated and started skimming, because it was just one battle trumping the last.

Err hello. The battles are the most interesting parts. Thats why the eleventh book was so good. It had so many giant battles. The characters are anything but 2d as they change dramaticly according to their different situations.

[Lord of the Helms]

I'm not gonna bother getting into the old "- Robert Jordan sucks! - No he doesn't" arguments since they generally go nowhere at all except for flaming territory. I'll just stick to saying that I've loved the series for a long time. I practically devoured books 1-6 and loved every single one of them. An extremely complex yet credible world without any serious plot holes, an exciting storyline, and I love much of the characters and the way Jordan always jumps from one perspective to another, and we get to see how one person's logical truth is another's ridiculous bullpoop. Plus, most of his books end with an extremely exciting climax that has cost me many a good night's sleep.

I still enjoyed books 7-9, though I agree they were drawn out too far an should not have been more than two books. Crossroads of Twilight I found abysmally boring and uneventful, and essentially you'd do better to read an online plot summary than waste your time with these 800 or so pages of nothing. Knife of Dreams on the other hand was very entertaining and his best book in many years (which I really needed at the time after the immense letdown that was A Feast for Crows, but that's another story), and right now I can't wait for him to finish book 12 and wrap the entire series up, no matter how many pages he needs.

[Nomrom]

I've read the books he has out a couple of times. I still the think the first book was on of the best books I've ever read. I'll admit they do get worse as he goes along, and that I did almost die trying to read book ten. However, I thought eleven was very good and am greatly looking forward to book twelve. One thing i don't understand though. People keep saying so and so writes better books. Don't waste your time on these, read his. Just because someone else may have written a better series, doesn't mean you should pass over this one. I have enjoyed them greatly as have many other people. If you have the time I would recommend reading them.

[Gavin Sage]

Crossroads of Twilight is a long march with not much ado happening. Just the concept of most of the book happening during the final chapter of Winter's Heart is rather bogus as a concept. The middle of a series always sags somewhere before it starts concluding itself.

(However it was much less dissapointing the Feast for Crows if only because of Mat. :smallsigh: )

[J_Muller]

Yeah, it was pretty annoying getting through Crossroads of Twilight and realizing that you could have skipped the book and lost nothing.

[Lord of the Helms]

(However it was much less dissapointing the Feast for Crows if only because of Mat. :smallsigh: )

Nah, I'd say they are about on a par as far as hugely diappointing books in previously excellent series go. It's just that Martin's nosedive was more abrupt and happened sooner :smalltongue:

[Gavin Sage]

Well its never a good sign when the author more or less apologizes in the book itself.

Though on CoT, I think we did need some more of Mat and Tuon just to have more than "they were destined to" going on. However you can't skip it. For good of ill you really can't skip anything in the Wheel of Time, well until you've read it at least six times or more. It took me until the third time to notice details like how that Darkfriend Paitr (name unsure off hand?) from book 1 shows up in Amadicia much later.

[Dragonrider]

I figure, if you like it, read it, if you don't, don't. By the way, I don't really think a comparison with Harry Potter is worth your time. They're different styles, different genres, completely different stories. I happen to enjoy Harry Potter. You don't have to if you don't want to. This is about WoT, not that.

I just think that WoT reaches a point where it's drowning itself in subplots. The ideas are very cool, but I get tired of the characters being childish with each other. Any discussion on these books are bound to end up with haters and lovers struggling to keep to the no-flaming rule. I don't hate them. Now, I also don't terribly sympathize with any of the characters; maybe that's because I'm a 15-year-old girl from a fairly privaleged background, but so much of what they do seems so petty and selfish.

There's cool magic. Some stuff is interesting and some isn't. There are good and bad points. I probably won't read them again. Ironically, the posts that talk about how awful it is annoy me more than the raves. I just dislike negativity in general. It can't be--it isn't--THAT bad, else no one would be reading it.

[Logic]

I know I read books 1-3, and loved them.

I am pretty positive I read book 4. If I read it, I liked it.

I may have read book 5, if I read 4. If I read it, I liked it.

There is nothing in the books I read that makes me think that things need to be changed or improved. They are entertaining & enjoyable pieces of fiction.

[Dragonrider]

The first ones are the best ones. :smalltongue:

[Catch]

Jordan has his moments, both cliché and epic. I'm on book eight and I'm starting to see where the critics are coming from. Call me optimistic at this point, but I've enjoyed them all so far.

The short of it is that love him or hate him, he's promised to make the next book his last (even if it's 2000 pages.)

[Logic]

Jordan has his moments, both cliché and epic. I'm on book eight and I'm starting to see where the critics are coming from. Call me optimistic at this point, but I've enjoyed them all so far.

The short of it is that love him or hate him, he's promised to make the next book his last (even if it's 2000 pages.)

Mostly because he has been diagnosed with a terminal illness of some sort, and is not expected to live much longer than 2010.

[Catch]

Mostly because he has been diagnosed with a terminal illness of some sort, and is not expected to live much longer than 2010.

Amyloidosis. And yes, I know. However, in regards to the final book, Jordan has said that he doesn't have more than one coherent book left in him. From Dragonmount.com:

"...it is not possible for him to write two more coherent books. He said he might get one coherent book, and one incoherent, or two semi-coherent, so The Wheel of Time would be finished by book 12."

The well's almost dry, in a sense.

[BrokenButterfly]

It has been a while since I read a Wheel of Time book, and I only read the first 8 (and New Spring) in the series anyway. I enjoyed the series enough to stick it out so long, but I drifted off to other books and games as I tend to do after any length of time.

I persuaded my Dad to read the series after I had, and he firmly believed that there were significant parallels between The Fellowship of the Ring and the first book. I didn't when I read it at first, but I can understand that there do seem to be similarities (but that is something that can be directed at a lot of fantasy literature since IMO, and it's not some flaw of the series or other authors). I feel that as the story progresses, it develops it's own flavour. It is not my favourite series of books, but I enjoyed them at the time, and I was already thinking about re-reading them, so I may do that soon.

[Gygaxphobia]

Ironically, the posts that talk about how awful it is annoy me more than the raves. I just dislike negativity in general. It can't be--it isn't--THAT bad, else no one would be reading it.

That's an interesting point, I find the hate is proportional to the disappointment.
If there wasn't something intriguing there in the first place, they wouldn't be read. But then the investment of time, emotion etc. provokes the disappointment and displeasure.
The reaction you see is about expression of that displeasure as well as trying to save others from experiencing the same pain!

[Telonius]

I gave up on Wheel of Time after I bought Crossroads of Twilight in hardcover. I figure Robert Jordan owes me either $30 or a book, because what I got was a two-pound paperweight. Nothing - nothing - happened to advance the plot. Now I seem to remember way back in English class, learning that if a scene doesn't do anything (either by developing a plot, developing the setting, or developing characters) it shouldn't be there. If a whole book doesn't do anything, the editor should be fired. The rest of his books had the same kind of problems, but nothing to the extent that Crossroads did.

That said, I'm glad that he keeps writing. It gives aspiring fantasy novelists (such as myself) hope. Because if that kind of stuff can get published, so can I. :smallbiggrin:

[Call_me_Fate]

That said, I'm glad that he keeps writing. It gives aspiring fantasy novelists (such as myself) hope. Because if that kind of stuff can get published, so can I. :smallbiggrin:

Although I agree with the sentiment about WoT, I think Eragon proves this point better.

[shakes019]

Yeah, it was pretty annoying getting through Crossroads of Twilight and realizing that you could have skipped the book and lost nothing.

QFT

Don't get me wrong, I liked reading the series, and had a habit of re-reading the series when each instalment came out, but CoT knocked me on my butt for sheer disappointment. I mean, it felt like nothing happened in that book.

On the whole, I like the story, and I enjoy the political machinations, but I really find that I now read them for Perrin's and Mat's stories and have a hard time concentrating on the other plotlines. I also wait to get them from the library instead of buying them on the day they come out.

[Aston]

QFT

Don't get me wrong, I liked reading the series, and had a habit of re-reading the series when each instalment came out, but CoT knocked me on my butt for sheer disappointment. I mean, it felt like nothing happened in that book.

On the whole, I like the story, and I enjoy the political machinations, but I really find that I now read them for Perrin's and Mat's stories and have a hard time concentrating on the other plotlines. I also wait to get them from the library instead of buying them on the day they come out.

I had similar feelings after the third one. I will try re-read them at some stage, but I think I am too negative to enjoy them now.

I will stick to shorter series in future.

Nothing against the length, just wish that he would get somewhere sometimes. But then, Tolkien in places makes me feel the same.

[Don Beegles]

Bad Aston, no, don't do it. Don't stick to shorter series; stick to better books. A Song of Ice and Fire is long but brillaint; i've heard the same about Malazan. Read them, but give WoT the boot.

That's like someone who reads Moby **** and decides to stay away from long books. You see, they're avoiding another Moby ****, but they're also denying themselves the Count of Monte Cristo and Les Miserables.

EDIT: Crap, I should have realized that Moby **** would be censored. I wish it blurred out the whole title so noone had to look at it.

[ravenkith]

The problem with the wheel of time series, as near as I can tell, is that 'Jordan' has what I like to call 'Dicken's disease'.

He's writing for the money.

As a result, he spends as much time as he can jawing on about inconsequential items so as to fill out his books, extending the series to the next one.

Why?

Well truthfully I believe he wants to make, and keep making, enough money to be able to live whatever years are left to him in relative comfort, and provide for his family, who will survive him.

Also, I'd imagine that whatever treatments he is undergoing are not the most inexpensive of options, either.

If you remove all of the non-essential stuff, and got right down to it, the story he wanted to tell originally could probably have been fit into two trilogies, with maybe a prequel thrown in for the hard core fans that wanted more background about the world and all the different things that live in it.

Then he could have gone either further back in time and told some stories from the age of legends.

Poor guy has a death sentencce hanging over him...it's not if, but when.

[Aston]

Bad Aston, no, don't do it. Don't stick to shorter series; stick to better books. A Song of Ice and Fire is long but brillaint; i've heard the same about Malazan. Read them, but give WoT the boot.

Sorry, I meant near future. Studies do not leave time for reading more than short stories/serials at the moment. Novels are pushing it. I have both Malazan and WoT on ice though. Will see if I can get anywhere.

[Don Beegles]

Yeah, I know what you mean. I want to read Dune, but I can't because i've got quite a lot of summer reading. And if my post seemed too sharp, which I realize it may have, it's because I don't like seeing people judge entire groups of books by one bad entry. That's like saying that I had a taco I didn't really like once, so I'm never eating Mexican food again, which is just silly.

[Gavin Sage]

Bad Aston, no, don't do it. Don't stick to shorter series; stick to better books. A Song of Ice and Fire is long but brillaint; i've heard the same about Malazan. Read them, but give WoT the boot.

I like Martin, but having read through the series a number of times I find diminishing returns each time. The story advances even slower then the WoT has. The two series are still up there beyond anything else I've read being put out today, but I know which is second.

A lot of objections people have seem to be centered around Crossroads of Twilight. But out of 11 books I can't expect all of them to be exciting. I slog through it and read Knife of Dreams, and hope Jordan doesn't suddenly take a turn for the worst.

I strongly object to the notion that Jordan is just writing to keep on writing for money. There is simply too much detail in the books as far as I'm concerned, little things like how mapped out secondary characters are. Or the Tower of Ghenjei, which we see in book one, here a bit more about in four, then becomes much more important as of book eleven. An author simply writing through wouldn't have the foreshadowing the whole series does, or the scope.

At least the main series, we want to talk about New Spring or what I've heard of the original plans for the prequels then yes there is some milking for cash there. Which illustrates when an author is milking for cash and not really telling a central story. They do it by spin-offs or continuations after the climax, or by starting new stories.

[Burrito]

Book 12, A Memory of Light, will be the last book. Jordan has said so several times, officially. He has a blog on www.dragonmount.com, which also chronicals his medical battles.
As far as certain books go, yes some are much, much better than others.
But this is a series, and you have to keep the "Big Picture" in mind. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
He is telling his story, and sometimes you need "explainer material", it may not be exciting battles or in depth character development, but for the story as a whole to come together, as the writter wants it to, it needs to be in there.

I won't go into R.R. Martin vs. Jordan since A) it is an entire series, and very different, and deserves a seperate thread. B) He is a different person/writter, so his failings and strengths, as such, shouldn't be used a ruler against Jordan.

[bdh5533]

The series to me feels like the dragonlance series. lots of characters, lots of small parts, one part maybe slightly more important.

I think the one bad point about these books is Jordan's desire to have everything happen in a chronological order. This really makes the book jump around in an attempt to cover everything. But it is the insistance on keeping everything chronological that makes it a bit unique.

I wouldn't blame the later book's prolonged recaps on Jordan, infact I bet the editors insisted on each book being able to be read first. which in a series this long, is insane.

[InsertNameHere]

Only one more book? That's a lot of story to finish. And a lot of people to kill.
I honestly couldn't tell the difference between the reading experience of CoT and the others. Maybe I don't pay attention. Whatever.

[Lord of the Helms]

Bad Aston, no, don't do it. Don't stick to shorter series; stick to better books. A Song of Ice and Fire is long but brillaint.


Considereing Jordan's crash and and burn happened after nine books while Martin's happened after three, that's not really a good point. Plus Jordan has already recovered with his latest effort, whereas we still have to wait and see if A Dance With Dragons makes up for the general poorness of A Feast for Crows.

[Gavin Sage]

Only one more book? That's a lot of story to finish. And a lot of people to kill.
I honestly couldn't tell the difference between the reading experience of CoT and the others. Maybe I don't pay attention. Whatever.

Yeah, I've read quote which say he doesn't care if Tor has to invent a new binding process or the book comes with its own library cart, it will be the last book.

And CoT its not so much that anything writing/style wise changed, just that nothing big happened. A large part of the book is "here's what EVERYONE else was doing while Rand was fooling around at Shadar Logoth in Winter's Heart" with reaction to aforemention world shaking event and just plain a lot of set up. I see it as Jordan having largely been steadily raising the stakes through the series and then spending a whole book reshuffling.

I'll bet when the series is complete it won't matter so much. I've yet to meet a series that doesn't spend some part of the itself just doing so much nothing. In a trilogy its generally the middle part. But without the completion and being the 10th out of 11 its harder to ignore.

[Lycurgus]

I have a feeling that we are all going to be slapping our foreheads when we finish the last book. "Holy crap that took a lot of planning! Click, click, click go the puzzle pieces! Now everything makes sense!" or "Is that it? Is that seriously it?" One or the other, I don't care, I just want my next book! :smalltongue:

[shakes019]

Just checked out his blog on Dragonmount.com, and I have to say that I will give him a pass on CoT, even though I didn't like it just because of this quote:


I don’t know exactly why the calendar contest is being limited to US residents. It is something the legal department insisted on. Now, if it was me, and I lived in Canada or Finland or somewhere, I might just take a chance that they wouldn’t look too closely at the return address. Or maybe I’d ask Justin to be a cut-out for me. But that’s just me. I would never suggest that any of you do these things. No. Never. Wouldn’t be prudent.

That and the fact that he shot down an RPG (that's rocket-propelled grenade, not role-playing game) in flight.

[Jayabalard]

However its the attention to detail that is what makes the books so interesting.I disagree; the attention to meaningless detail does exactly the opposite: make the books tedious.

[Don Beegles]

I agree, Jaya. Attention to detail that is interesting is like in Les Mis, when Fauchlevent from the village is the convent guardener, or in Le Comte de Monte Cristo, when the conversation he has about poisons piques your curiosity long before it is really important. Jordan's details aren't so much things like these that help the plot or get the reader involved. All of the Aes Sedai subplots and such are more like his attempts to add more detail, because he wants to play in his world, and he thinks good books need attention to detail. Now, there's nothing wrong with messing around in your world, but giving it to a reader after that is just mean. And good detail that helps things makes a book good, but just muddying the waters a bit to make things confusing isn't good when it's dragged out for 6 or 8 books.

[Don Beegles]

I agree, Jaya. Attention to detail that is interesting is like in Les Mis, when Fauchlevent from the village is the convent guardener, or in Le Comte de Monte Cristo, when the conversation he has about poisons piques your curiosity long before it is really important. Jordan's details aren't so much things like these that help the plot or get the reader involved. All of the Aes Sedai subplots and such are more like his attempts to add more detail, because he wants to play in his world, and he thinks good books need attention to detail. Now, there's nothing wrong with messing around in your world, but giving it to a reader after that is just mean. And good detail that helps things makes a book good, but just muddying the waters a bit to make things confusing isn't good when it's dragged out for 6 or 8 books.

[Lycurgus]

I find all the detail is what fleshes out a world. I like having background and surrounding circumstances for stories I read. And finding out about things well before they are important is this nifty little technique called foreshadow. I find that it only adds to the entertainment value of a novel when I am kept guessing and making as many connections as I can. I feel that no detail is meaningless. They can only add flavor or help you imagine the scene more clearly.

[Don Beegles]

But you see, a hundred pages about two Aes Sedai who are only added to the plot to add 'detail' to the world and are not very good characters is not good detail. It's going too far. Jordan's problem is that he's addicted to detail; he thinks that any problem can be fixed by adding some more backstory or more information about the world. That's why it gets so bloated; because he's just pumping in more and more detail without adding anything for the detail to paint. After like the fifth book f(fluff)=2ex, while f(content) is more like .5ln(x).

[Gavin Sage]

Might I ask which two Aes Sedai are these hundred pages for?

See I find the attention to detail does add things, making rereading great because I have so much to sink my teeth into. I can find how little hints have been spread over the course of multiple books. The WoT as a world lives and breathes, and the detail expounds upon one of the central themes of the complexity of the Pattern. Everything has some meaning in the grand scheme and for once a book says that and pays as attention to more then just the world shakings of its main characters. Its taking story telling to a level I've never seen elsewhere.

Interesting how different people read different things from different books.

[Lycurgus]

Please, if the detail is too much for you, find a simpler book. I'm sure they still sell the **** and Jane books somewhere. You have no idea if your alleged 100 pages are going to be important somewhere later in the series. Also, if you are concerned about too much detail and plot depth, avoid the Dune series at all costs.
Gavin: I don't know if you've seen it, but there is a coffee table book called The World of Robert Jordan's The Wheel of Time that has tons more details on characters, countries, and history.

[Gygaxphobia]

Please, if the detail is too much for you, find a simpler book. I'm sure they still sell the **** and Jane books somewhere. You have no idea if your alleged 100 pages are going to be important somewhere later in the series. Also, if you are concerned about too much detail and plot depth, avoid the Dune series at all costs.
Gavin: I don't know if you've seen it, but there is a coffee table book called The World of Robert Jordan's The Wheel of Time that has tons more details on characters, countries, and history.

That's just the kind of immature jibe I'm coming to expect from RJ lovers. :smallannoyed:
Dune is well thought out and planned, the detail is relevant and doesn't overwhelm the plot.
This "foreshadowing" you keep talk about is a skillful literary technique well beyond RJ. What he does is simply return to a previous subject, there's no hinting of what will happen next.


You have no idea if your alleged 100 pages are going to be important somewhere later in the series.

That's the point, nor does he!

[Don Beegles]

I honestly don't remember who the Aes Sedai were, because I stopped paying too much attention, but it was the pair (or group, I honestly don't remember) that was investigating the White Tower and had the prologue to one of the books about them. I think that's where he goes to far; he just adds too many characters when it would be just as effective to not go into such great detail about Tower politics. We already understand that their might be Black ajah in the tower, because it's been said often enough. That would be a good level of detail. Actually taking time away from the main story to show the hunt for the Black Ajah is unnecessary detail that detracts.

I think you misunderstand me, Lycurgus. I love stories that are full of detail: Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn, Amber, even the Brothers Karamazov or the Hunchback of Notre Dame. Hell, I've currently got Dune on hold at the library, because I've heard that's it's full of detailed and intertwined story lines. I think we have a conflict of interests that can't really be resolved, because I like to read books for either the plot and characters or the underlying philosophy the writer is espousing. Preferably both. If the details in the book enhance my enjoymnent of either of those two things, then they are good details. If they are there merely to 'flesh out the world' then they are misplaced, because the time he is spending on unimportant things could be better spent by fleshing out the world through the characters or somethign to that effect. For instance, the Amber series by Zelazny is about four books long, and all together probably adds up to about 1.5 WoT books. It is crammed, however, with an incredible picture of Amber and all of the shadow worlds, because rather than having the narrator tell you about places and things, characters weave them into dialogue, or you go there, which is much more interesting, and it gives a better image beacuse the world is not just where the story takes place, it is part of the story.

Think of it this way, if you read a book about England, which do you think would better absorb you into the pagan history of the country: a book that introduces minor characters to explore Stonehenge and talks about it unneccessarily for quite a while, or one whose actual climax occurs with the main characters at Stonehenge? I would obviously say the latter, as you can tell, but it's essentially a matter of opinion.

[Telonius]

Please, if the detail is too much for you, find a simpler book. I'm sure they still sell the **** and Jane books somewhere. You have no idea if your alleged 100 pages are going to be important somewhere later in the series. Also, if you are concerned about too much detail and plot depth, avoid the Dune series at all costs.
Gavin: I don't know if you've seen it, but there is a coffee table book called The World of Robert Jordan's The Wheel of Time that has tons more details on characters, countries, and history.

It's not the detail that's the problem, it's the exruciating, uninteresting detail without the plot depth. Take "The Stand" by Stephen King (unabridged version). It is 1500 pages long - even longer than the longest WoT book - with about as many characters as a Robert Jordan book. There's tons of detail about the characters and setting, with plenty of foreshadowing and all the rest of it. And it's a page-turner. I loved it, because it does all of that stuff well. "It," "Dune," "Book of the Long Sun," "Lord of the Rings," ... I could go on for some more with long, complicated books and series that are skillfully written.

My beef with Robert Jordan is that he does all of that stuff poorly. WoT has the same problem that the "Thieves' World" series (edited by Robert Asprin) had by around book 6 or 7. Too many one-note characters; plot all over the map; lack of clear motivation for the minor characters; each book tries to top the last be getting more and more outlandish in its battles and powers; classical structure of "intro-rising action-climax-falling action-denoument" is absent. (There's a reason it's the classical structure). Thieves' World had the good excuse that it was a bunch of short stories written by different authors, and the books were only around 250 pages or so. WoT... needs an editor, badly.

[Lycurgus]

What would absorb me into the pagan history of England is a book that actually discussed it rather that having a few people pop in for a few minutes to a site that is just a blip on the radar screen of that history. It's also pretty obvious that you go into things with preconcieve notions (i.e., your statement that detail does not overwhelm the plot in Dune when you haven't read it). Also, try a little harder to realize that yes, we do have a difference of opinion and neither of us is right. The reason people like me react so negatively to people like you is that your posts come across as overbearing "I am right, and the rest of you are wrong," statements. Do not, for one instant, think that you have any idea why I read what I read. Yes, I did gather that little jab from your implication. Also, the "main story" of the Wheel of Time is the fight against the Dark One, on all its fronts. Therefore, the detail provided in the hunt for the Black Ajah is, in fact, part of the "main story."

[Don Beegles]

What would absorb me into the pagan history of England is a book that actually discussed it rather that having a few people pop in for a few minutes to a site that is just a blip on the radar screen of that history.

You see, that's my point. It occurred to me in the middle of the debate that we were reading for different things, and that question was just a way of testing it. For me, the time they pop in on Stonehenge in Tess of the D'Urbervilles (the example I was thinking of) really made me realize how deep and important all of the ancient sites were to England and its culture, especially given all of the little hints that Hardy had already given. It so happened that I liked the subtlety better than I would have a flat-out dissertation on its importance. I think, and there is a fairly large crowd that agrees with me, just as there is one that agrees with you, that it would be more effecitve if Jordan merely suggested the details of his world by more deftly weaving them into his story, rather than directly telling you about them.


It's also pretty obvious that you go into things with preconcieve notions (i.e., your statement that detail does not overwhelm the plot in Dune when you haven't read it).
Everyone goes into things with preconceived notions; there are just too many books in the world that if I picked at random I'd never read the really good ones, so I work based on what I am told. I went into the WoT series with the preconceived notion that it was going to be amazing based on what a friend's sister had said, and thought that it was great in the beginning, but then formed my own idea that it was bad later. Preconceived notions can change.

And I only referenced Dune specifically because you brought it up. You directly insulted me and said that I would prefer D*ick and Jane to it, which I thought was ironic, because I have it on hold because I've 'heard' that it's great. You'll note that I did say "i've heard it's full of detailed and intertwined plotlines". I didn't come out and say that it did, because I don't know; it could very well be over hyped, much like WoT, but i won't know until I read it.


Also, try a little harder to realize that yes, we do have a difference of opinion and neither of us is right. The reason people like me react so negatively to people like you is that your posts come across as overbearing "I am right, and the rest of you are wrong," statements.

What do you mean, try harder to understand it's a difference of opinion?! I do realize it, which is why I said it! And the reason I tend to react so negatively to 'people like you' is for that very defense. The OP said I like them, but this is what's bad. The next poster said they started good and got worse. The third said the politics are interesting but don't excuse the snail's pace. Later, people said that the details do indeed excuse the snail's pace. Everybody in this thread has been stating opinions as fact, just because it's easier than saying IMO, IMHO, I think, etc every time you post, not just the Anti-WoT crowd. So for you to fall back on that argument after being in the heat of things with me is just irritating. You have as little right to it as I do.



Do not, for one instant, think that you have any idea why I read what I read. Yes, I did gather that little jab from your implication.
If I did make that jab, could you explain to me what I am saying about why you read? Because I truly and honestly did not intend to make any accusation like that, at least not in a denigrating way.


Also, the "main story" of the Wheel of Time is the fight against the Dark One, on all its fronts. Therefore, the detail provided in the hunt for the Black Ajah is, in fact, part of the "main story."

You see, this is another one of those places where Jordan does something that you like and I don't. You're certainly right that that's the central story of the series, and I just think that there are too many fronts. Think about World War 1 and you'll realize that you should never fight a two front war, let alone write a 12 front book. :smalltongue: I am of the opinion that it would work better if Jordan focused solely on the truly most important characters and their fights, rather than worrying about all of the secondary plots that just cloud up the story. By main story, I meant the plots that Rand, Mat, Perrin, and the other ten or so main characters are in, which would be manageable. When you try to make your main story all-encompassing and not tone it down at all, you are bound to get lost. Look at LotR as the quintessential example. In three books of about 400 pages each, Tolkien managed to show an conflict over all of Middle-Earth(Which is more detailed than the WoT world). He did this by sticking to the major characters that you are familiar with and having their three or four stories reflect the state of the world, not by having two dozen main stories that together show how things are going.

[Xian]

That said, I'm glad that he keeps writing. It gives aspiring fantasy novelists (such as myself) hope. Because if that kind of stuff can get published, so can I. :smallbiggrin:

If "Dragons: Lexicon Triumvrate" can get published, then you have nothing to worry about.

My 2 cents for those who love the universe, hate the story - play the PC game from '99/'00. It's absolutely wonderful. It touches all the fun points (Aes Sedai, the Forsaken, the Ways....hell, Shadar Logoth is the second stage) in an easy to digest, yet well written story that cuts all the excess.

[Gavin Sage]

Gavin: I don't know if you've seen it, but there is a coffee table book called The World of Robert Jordan's The Wheel of Time that has tons more details on characters, countries, and history.

The big white book? Seen it and happily own it. Full of fun and juicy details. Tell you some stuff not gone into much in the books. Too bad a lot of the art is rather lame.


When you try to make your main story all-encompassing and not tone it down at all, you are bound to get lost.

Here I think we can see the critical difference of opinion. You seemingly have gotten lost. I haven't, and theres more than enough of a fandom for the books (if not here) to say plenty of others haven't either. Of course I've gotten lost in books much less detailed and complex too. It isn't even that those books I didn't get were terribly written, they didn't click with me.

[J_Muller]

My 2 cents for those who love the universe, hate the story - play the PC game from '99/'00. It's absolutely wonderful. It touches all the fun points (Aes Sedai, the Forsaken, the Ways....hell, Shadar Logoth is the second stage) in an easy to digest, yet well written story that cuts all the excess.

And perhaps if the gameplay were more enjoyable, and not simply agonizingly difficult, more people would play that.

[Lycurgus]

You see, that's my point. It occurred to me in the middle of the debate that we were reading for different things, and that question was just a way of testing it. For me, the time they pop in on Stonehenge in Tess of the D'Urbervilles (the example I was thinking of) really made me realize how deep and important all of the ancient sites were to England and its culture, especially given all of the little hints that Hardy had already given. It so happened that I liked the subtlety better than I would have a flat-out dissertation on its importance. I think, and there is a fairly large crowd that agrees with me, just as there is one that agrees with you, that it would be more effecitve if Jordan merely suggested the details of his world by more deftly weaving them into his story, rather than directly telling you about them.

Tess of the D'Urbervilles? And earlier, where-ever it was, you said something about reading for philosophy and so forth. The Wheel of Time is a fantasy series. It is written for entertainment, not a social commentary, not anti-establishment, not to express a worldview. Comparing it to the some of theses books you bring up is like comparing Mozart to AC/DC. While I greatly enjoy both, I don't look at them as remotely similar and I don't expect to get anywhere near the same thing out of them. If I'm in the mood to look into a book and search for symbolism and ponder the deeper meanings present, yeah I'll go pick up Camus or Poe or Faulkner or Salinger or whomever. Not Robert Jordan. You don't watch Citizen Kane and Indiana Jones in the same mindset. As to the details; this is a completely fictional world that Jordan wants seen a certain way. If it was set in England or Albania or New Guinea you would know the details or could pick up a book providing them. Being a fantasy novel set in a fantasy world that has been created for the reader's escapism, the books give all these details so the reader is completely immersed in the world.

[Don Beegles]

Gavin: That was a bit of a vague statement. When I saiud "You are bound to get lost", I meant the writer. I can follow the books with no problem, but I get a feeling when I read them that Jordan has dug himself into a giant hole leading up CoT and with the last two is just trying to dig himself out. It's nothying I could put my finger on, but he seems to me like he's tryed to do too much stuff and not quite been up to the task.

Lycurgus: I mentioned Tess just as an example of what I meant by suggessting details, not to really compare the two. Maybe because it's set in a real place it wasn't a great example, so I'll try a different one. In Zelazny's Amber series, the main characters can manipulate the fabric of the world to move among parallel universes. The narrator never comes out and directly explains how this works, and the reader is forced to gather the details from experience and conversations between characters. This I find is more effective an immersion technique than merely coming out and spoonfeeding the reader, because it makes them wonder more and so there's more of an emotional connection to each new detail they find.

And I just mentioend reading for the underlying point because it's one strategy I use when I read. I don't expect Jordan to be a dissertation on something because I don't always want that. I only mentioned it because if the writer isn't telling me something important, I expect all that detail to support the story and characters and help me enjoy them better. With Jordan, they don't. They're just there so he can jerk himself off and flesh out his world, which is just gratuitous and doesn't help anything. I don't want to feel immersed into his world; if I did I'd just find someone's fanfic travelogue. I come to a book to enjoy the plot and characters' interactions. The world is only there to make those more interesting and support them, so if you are talking about your universe, and it doesn't help anything besides your universe, then it does nothing for me, and I think it's just bad writing./

[Lycurgus]

So describing cultures and historical events that the characters know as common knowledge or interact with that affect their ways of thinking and actions is bad writing? Sounds to me like it's solidly planted in the idea of letting you see things through the character's eyes. Once again, fantasy and sci-fi are about escapism...it's kind of the point of reading that you do become immersed in their world. There have been several instances throughout the series that did explicitly explain things. When the characters were being instructed in something, or when Rand was learning of the history of the Aiel, just as every person who went through the test did. Sometimes hinting at things can do well to drive a plot, like Lovecraft or Howard did in their "weird fiction" type of stories where things are shadowy and just beyond the ken of the characters. But the characters in the Wheel of Time are constantly learning things as they develop and we are learning with them. I'd much rather know that an Aes Sedai is weaving Earth, Fire, and Spirit to do something than "She concentrated and wove some stuff together and Bang! it happened." The naming of the various sword positions is a very common thing in the martial arts systems of Asia and Jordan uses that to show that there is a systematic and long-standing tradition of sword-art in his world, not just hack at them until they fall down. Just a couple examples, but generally the "excess" detail is excessively important detail to the characters when it is presented.

Gavin: Dude, the art isn't rather lame. It's pitiful. Damn shame they didn't shell out a little more cash to get the guy that did the covers. Or at least someone besides the art department director's 12 year old who was in the office for summer vacation. :smalltongue:

[Don Beegles]

I know Lycurgus, often the information and detail is rather important, and when it is I don't mind it. Having names for sword positions and the descriptions of the gates in the Aes Sedai trials (the ones that show past and future) is good and helps makes things better. I could be wrong, however, but that wasn't what bothered me. Like 've been saying, things like that are good. It was when the narrator came out and mentioned things that weren't important at the time either because the world needed expansion or because it was going to be important later. Now, I have a suspicion that that last statement will be taken as meaning I don't like foreshadowing, and that's not the case either. I love it when something that a character does or that happens to him is a hint to later actions, and prophecies are much fun. I just seem to recall several instances in WoT where the narrator would insert a little tidbit as an aside that seemed so tangential to the current situation that it was obvious it would come up later, which is just clumsy. I apologize that I can't give any specific examples, but they were always just little paragraphs, but there were enough of them that they started to wear on me, along with the other things that bothered me about the books.

[Lianae]

I personally enjoyed all the detail the books had, in the earlier ones at least. Detail is good, I do enjoy getting a clear picture of the world etc., but I feel that it's more when the detail does nothing to advance the main plot that it gets tedious...Crossroads of Twilight, I'm looking at you. This (http://shadowburn.binmode.com/wotnow/comic.php?comic_id=119) sorta summed that up for me. That said, though, I'm about to start KoD, which I haven't read that and I have heard that it's an improvement, so fingers crossed.

[Lycurgus]

Like a description of marriage knives and the importance of knives to Altarans? Well, if you don't know these things several of their common phrases don't make sense and the fact that Altarans, especially Ebou Dari are prone to duel at the drop of a hat makes quite a difference to the characters. Or maybe the sa'sara? The fact that it may have restored the throne of Saldaea at one point has a pretty good effect on the story because the Saldaens involved in the story would more likely be involved in a rebellion/civil war. Holding with the Saldaens, maybe the language of fans bothers you? It show just how important restraint is among the women of the Saldaen court. The different orders and ranks of the Children of the Light? It' so they don't just blend together as Whitecloak #1,2,3. Think storm troopers in Star Wars. The different clans, holds, and societies of the Aiel? So they don't come up as Aiel 1,2,3 and you also have to consider that this is a large society that developed out of a smaller one. While they apparently avoided the genetic Founder Effect, they didn't avoid the cultural one. (Twelve clans of Aiel, Twelve tribes of Israel...I wonder if that was on purpose...hmmm, they're in a desert too...) I, for one, am very glad that Jordan actually took the time to come up with the Old Tongue, I wish Paolini had made some attempt, but I'll cut him some slack because he probably started the first draft of Eragon when he was like 14. But that's something for another thread.

[Don Beegles]

I understand the need for all of those things, Lycurgus, I only feel that Jordan's way of presenting them by just stating them is inefficient and uninteresting. I just started Dune the other day, so I'll use it as an example. The Bene Gesserit is obviously an important part of the story, but it is not really directly explained. You learn of it through the characters' reactions to Bene Gesserit, and their thoughts and feelings about the women. When you start to understand what the Missionaria Protectiva is, you feel the Lady Jessica as well as learn about it, so you are getting invested in the characters and the world, rather than Jordan's inefficient way of telling you things and then letting them impact his characters.

[Lycurgus]

You mean as they affect his characters? Everything in the Dune series is explained in its own time, just as in the Wheel of Time. Herbert is generally acknowledged as a genius of fiction. He will necessarily do things more deftly than most authors. Herbert, Tolkein, Howard, and Lovecraft are all well known to all of us so we are more likely to use them as a comparison. These men were also masters of their craft. These are the guys that inspire people to write. We could compare other authors to them all day, but it wouldn't be realistic or fair to the other authors. I don't run around comparing Dickens or Doyle to Shakespeare or the Wachowski brothers to Michael Curtiz.

I guess the thing that I find most interesting is that you are putting so much effort into a discussion about something you say isn't worth your or other people's time...

[Don Beegles]

I dunno, I would say that Doyle is a genius of the mystery field, and I'm not certain that Shakespeare could write novels as well as Dickens. But the comparison of Jordan to Herbert stands because they're in the same field. And I have said that Jordan isn't an awful writer; he's better than Paolini. I've always just contended that he's merely good, and when there's so much better, why bother?

And I put so much effort in because I like discussion. It's as simple as that. :smallsmile: Even though I won't change you and you probably won't change me, it's still fun. Besides, I won't say the WoT is a complete waste of time. I recommend that people give it a shot up to the sixth or seventh book. By that point they'll know whether they liked it, and if they didn't, what did they really lose?

[Logic]

...what did they really lose?
Potentially, several hours of their life. However, the books are good enough that most people won't want their time back. :smalltongue:

[BooBooSpooki]

Just in case this thread may convince someone to read (or not to read) the series...

I very seldom read a book more than once or watch a movie more than once (unless there's someone to snuggle up with on the couch). I can see myself re-reading these books for a long time -- in fact, I'm busy with my second reading of Knife of Dreams at the moment.

[Lycurgus]

I dunno, I would say that Doyle is a genius of the mystery field, and I'm not certain that Shakespeare could write novels as well as Dickens. But the comparison of Jordan to Herbert stands because they're in the same field. And I have said that Jordan isn't an awful writer; he's better than Paolini. I've always just contended that he's merely good, and when there's so much better, why bother?

And I put so much effort in because I like discussion. It's as simple as that. :smallsmile: Even though I won't change you and you probably won't change me, it's still fun. Besides, I won't say the WoT is a complete waste of time. I recommend that people give it a shot up to the sixth or seventh book. By that point they'll know whether they liked it, and if they didn't, what did they really lose?

It was a comparison of skill levels.:smallsigh: Besides that, I'm pretty sure Shakespeare could outwrite any of them. He just had the knack, but that isn't the point of the thread. Also, go back and read post #23 (Go Gavin! :smallwink: ) Telling someone to read half the series and decide if they like it is like telling someone to watch half a movie, turn it off, and decide. They will either like it before that an stick through the whole thing, will stick through it out of hope that the end will make it worthwhile, or will dislike it enough to stop before that point. Why bother when there is better? There aren't that many that are significantly better, and if I can read one of Jordan's books in a few days, I can read theirs just as fast. I'm not willing to not have a novel to read. I read all these books you referenced in highschool. You are welcome to keep your literature, as I slog my way through most of it. I'm happy to read even the shallow D&D novels because I am reading for entertainment, and Jordan is just what the doctor ordered, all 12 books worth. My only beef is that he started the prequel trilogy before finishing the series.

[SITB]

My only beef is that he started the prequel trilogy before finishing the series.

And the horrible, horrible 10th book.

[Aston]

Interesting points.

I still see the books as a tad too detailed. The detail in Dune and LotR did not seem to get in the way as much. Not to say I did not enjoy those WoT books that I have read while reading them, just that I got the feeling afterwards of "Now what actually happened?" and not really being able to come up with enough to make the time I spent reading them worth it.

I thought them well-written and engaging, but they did not grab me like other stuff I have read has. But then I prefer SF to fantasy, so that might be it. And LotR I read when I was much younger and more into fantasy.


Besides, I won't say the WoT is a complete waste of time. I recommend that people give it a shot up to the sixth or seventh book. By that point they'll know whether they liked it, and if they didn't, what did they really lose?

I think what Beegles meant is simply that if the books have not grabbed you by the 6th or 7th book, they will not if you keep reading? At least that is how I see it. Apologies if you meant something else.

[CurlyKitGirl]

This is a bit off-topic considering everyones talking about detail, but, well have you ever looked in the glossary? Specifically, the Trolloc entry. Has anyone noticed how punny it is apart from me? The tribes are:
Dhai'mon (DEMON)
D'havol (DEVIL)
D'jinn (DJINN)
G'holum (GOLUM)
A'ffritt (AFREET)
G'houl (GHOUL)
Ko'bal (KOBALD)

There's more but what I find annoying is that he does this and expects noone to notice. I also find it funny because he uses all these 'evil' monster names and people notice only occaisionally. These are only vague remebrances of the names because I don't use the glossary that often. It just struck me as enormously punny. I do realise I'll probaly be called odd for actually looking at the glossary and remembering this.

[Lycurgus]

I'm pretty sure he expects us to notice...note the use of Shai'tan, among other things. He's used a lot of twists on traditional things. Just look at the names of the Forsaken. *shrug* I'm not really bothered by what he names things because things like this happen all the time. Just look at the amount that has been stolen from Tolkien by pretty much every fantasy writer since. If you are looking for analogs you could talk about the Aiel/Fremen (which we covered earlier), the Seanchan/Imperial Chinese, Children of the Light/Knights Templar, Andor/England during the War of the Roses (note the Rose Crown), or Cairhien as a combination of feudal Japan and Renaissance Spain or Italy.

[Aston]

I'm pretty sure he expects us to notice...note the use of Shai'tan, among other things. He's used a lot of twists on traditional things. Just look at the names of the Forsaken. *shrug* I'm not really bothered by what he names things because things like this happen all the time. Just look at the amount that has been stolen from Tolkien by pretty much every fantasy writer since. If you are looking for analogs you could talk about the Aiel/Fremen (which we covered earlier), the Seanchan/Imperial Chinese, Children of the Light/Knights Templar, Andor/England during the War of the Roses (note the Rose Crown), or Cairhien as a combination of feudal Japan and Renaissance Spain or Italy.

Fair point, but I still think that if you attempt to create a culture out of vacumn it will feel fake. If you call someone something and base them on Vikings (even mentally) then you have a heap of stuff that suddenly works: How they live, fight, are organised, type of government.

If you can spin a new race out of whole cloth and make it convincing, you are very good.

[Gavin Sage]

I'm pretty sure he expects us to notice...note the use of Shai'tan, among other things. He's used a lot of twists on traditional things. Just look at the names of the Forsaken. *shrug* I'm not really bothered by what he names things because things like this happen all the time. Just look at the amount that has been stolen from Tolkien by pretty much every fantasy writer since. If you are looking for analogs you could talk about the Aiel/Fremen (which we covered earlier), the Seanchan/Imperial Chinese, Children of the Light/Knights Templar, Andor/England during the War of the Roses (note the Rose Crown), or Cairhien as a combination of feudal Japan and Renaissance Spain or Italy.

Most of the nations have real world analogs. This is deliberate but then nothing quite matches up either, so is still unique. Tear has elements of Spain but also the far east for example. Of course many people like to speculate that if the WoT books take place in the Third Age, that the First Age is our own.

Little things like Mosk and Merk referencing Moscow and America "and lances of fire" being nuclear weapons, etc. An eagle flying to the moon. Mixed with repeated speeches (by Thom mostly) about how the future warps the past. And of course the Mercedes logo showed up at one point too. I find all the juicy details fun to chew on.

[Lycurgus]

Most of the nations have real world analogs. This is deliberate but then nothing quite matches up either, so is still unique. Tear has elements of Spain but also the far east for example. Of course many people like to speculate that if the WoT books take place in the Third Age, that the First Age is our own.

Little things like Mosk and Merk referencing Moscow and America "and lances of fire" being nuclear weapons, etc. An eagle flying to the moon. Mixed with repeated speeches (by Thom mostly) about how the future warps the past. And of course the Mercedes logo showed up at one point too. I find all the juicy details fun to chew on.

Exactly, it's like a set of books by...S.M. Stirling(?) where it was fantasy, but it was post-apocolyptic and you could piece things together to figure out it was in eastern Europe. The eagle with shield and arrows showed up as a demon symbol at one point. There were a few other schticks like that, but I can't really remember them...I guess I'm getting old and senile.:smallamused: