Modernizing the Wheel of Time

[Ramza00]

That's bad enough on its own, but then you layer on yet more arbitrary RJ weirdness in the magic system, like a man needing to control the link (except for the FMF configuration for some reason), and women being unable to end it or stop giving consent for it on her/their own.

Yeah, there's a lot about the magic system that is just deeply weird and seemingly there for the sake of being weird.

Yept, like I said earlier in the thread (and most other people did not bring up, or they brought up and dropped.) this aspect of domination and "control" happens numerous times in the books and it is key plot points that without this subtle aspect of domination or control the story would never have ended up in the places it did.

It is the creation of "total experiences places" where things can be only done in a single way that drive both the metaphysics of Robert Jordans work, sometimes embracing this, and sometimes pointing out this total experience creates absurd conflicts and we humans need to grow as individuals and accept more subjectivity, more contrition, more not trying to create places where there can only be one form of authority, a total experience, and if you are not part of that system you will be dominated.

[Zalabim]

Channelers are born with access only to Saidar or Saidin, but within each half there's a nigh infinite spectrum of affinities and talents displayed. Male or female side is equivalent to sex, and then affinities and talents are equivalent to gender expression, though they aren't necessarily linked to it. I could expect any transgender channeler to have complex feelings about the side of the One Power they were born with, just as they may have complex feelings about gonads. I just don't see an inherent problem with the divide in magic. There may always be people determined to find one anyway. That's part and parcel with creative endeavours.

The True Power isn't "evil because sexual differences are good." It offers an undivided power source, but that is a shiny lure that carries a package of features that leads to envy, pride, distrust, isolation, conformity, and destruction. Capability with Saidin and Saidar isn't mediated by how male/masculine or female/feminine the channeler is. Individual talents and limits are just a fact of life. In contrast, capability in the true power is controlled by the Dark One's favor, but there is no inherent limit. It is then capable of marvels that with the One Power would require prodigious gifts, talents, links, or be flatly impossible. Users of the True Power do not link. The potential for immense singular power can already be isolating, but the power alone is not evil, just destructive. The way it is mediated through the Dark One then amplifies its downsides.

With the One Power, we can create an age of legends only by working together. Each channeler enriches the world with a unique blend of talents and gifts bestowed by their Creator.
/
With the True Power, I can rule the world if I am the most favored by the central authority that controls this power. Any other powers are my rivals and enemies. They are to be ruled or destroyed.

The Wheel of Time offers an expansive world where the differences between people, and between societies are explored, vital, and celebrated. Those differences are occasionally obstacles, but not insurmountable, and not something to be crushed down by might and force.

[tiornys]

Aran'gar isn't the only problem this approach creates though. Because by making the Power tied to biological sex characteristics in this way, the metaphor for linking moves away from joining minds/emotions, and becomes joining bodies. That's bad enough on its own, but then you layer on yet more arbitrary RJ weirdness in the magic system, like a man needing to control the link (except for the FMF configuration for some reason), and women being unable to end it or stop giving consent for it on her/their own.

I don't agree those are problems with the approach. But to be clear, I'm proposing that access to the power be tied to biological sex. Use of the power can still be the domain of the mind/spirit/soul.

[Rodin]

I'd like to step away from the representation side of things for a moment to ask a tangential question.

What evidence do we have that trans people don't exist in the Wheel of Time world? Channelers are already a tiny portion of the population - a fraction of one percent if we go by the number of Aes Sedai compared to normals. Yes, there are more channelers than the Aes Sedai realized but even then it was still a tiny number of people. The amount of men that can channel is even smaller thanks to the Red Ajah.

That leaves you with a small fraction of the population (transgender people) crossing with a second tiny fraction of the population (channelers), and then having to meet further requirements like being strong enough to be noticed. Compounding on that we have medieval discrimination towards both groups.

But wait, it gets worse. A trans channeler would be forced to hide their ability no matter what. If they present as male, that gets them lynched and likely on an Aes Sedai hit list. If they present as female they're channeling Saidin and have going crazy to worry about.

For a trans channeler to be noted in the story, they have to meet some pretty stringent criteria.

1) They have to be alive at this point in history, or have been a big enough deal that they made history. In a world where history is fragmented at best and straight up missing a lot of the time.
2) It has to be known that they are trans. For all we know, one or more of the historical characters were trans and it never came out.
3) They have to be powerful and/or influential enough to be noted by the story. Even within the Aes Sedai we deal almost entirely with the top 1% - the Sitters, the Amyrlins, and others of similar standing.

In addition to all of that, much of what we learn about channeling is shown to be false and/or misinterpreted. The people we get all our channeling knowledge from are shown to be incorrect repeatedly as the series goes on. What's one more?

There's no reason to believe that trans channelers don't exist just because we don't see any. A group that would already be trying to hide its own existence is given a very powerful additional incentive to keep themselves hidden, and they do so successfully and we never learn of their existence.

Let me stress again - this is by no means me stating an opinion about representation in a TV adaptation. I'm all for that. Work it in however you have to. I'm talking purely in Watsonian terms here - a lack of trans characters in the story shouldn't be a surprise. From a Doylist perspective the explanation is much simpler - Jordan wrote the books in the 90s when representation was much lower and it likely never occurred to him that he should try. And that's without going into any personal beliefs he may have had.

[Psyren]

I don't agree those are problems with the approach. But to be clear, I'm proposing that access to the power be tied to biological sex. Use of the power can still be the domain of the mind/spirit/soul.

Would you categorize rules like "women are inherently weaker than men" and "men can't link" and "women who link with a man can't voluntarily terminate that link, but men can" under access, or use?

Yept, like I said earlier in the thread (and most other people did not bring up, or they brought up and dropped.) this aspect of domination and "control" happens numerous times in the books and it is key plot points that without this subtle aspect of domination or control the story would never have ended up in the places it did.

It is the creation of "total experiences places" where things can be only done in a single way that drive both the metaphysics of Robert Jordans work, sometimes embracing this, and sometimes pointing out this total experience creates absurd conflicts and we humans need to grow as individuals and accept more subjectivity, more contrition, more not trying to create places where there can only be one form of authority, a total experience, and if you are not part of that system you will be dominated.

I don't think you need any of these squicky aspects to tell the story though. For example, with the "link ownership" thing - just make it so whoever controls the link (regardless of gender) decides what to do with it until they choose to relinquish that control. That gets you the story stuff like Nynaeve trying to reflexively pull back from Rand's link during the cleansing and failing , or Aran'gar killing Eben because he was stuck in a link he didn't control, without any of those implications.

You can even have Callandor break that rule - due to its lack of a buffer, the only way for Rand to use it safely is to link with two saidar-users, and relinquish control to one of them. It's a flawed sa'angreal, after all, it can break any of the rules of channeling that it needs to.

[tiornys]

Would you categorize rules like "women are inherently weaker than men" and "men can't link" and "women who link with a man can't voluntarily terminate that link, but men can" under access, or use?

I'd have those be properties of Saidin and Saidar.

[Psyren]

I'd have those be properties of Saidin and Saidar.

Gotcha. I wouldn't.

[lord_khaine]

Urg.. i really should not have turned my back on something this explosive. Can see it kinda ran from me.
There are more things that deserved a reply. But will try and avoid reviving to many topics.

I recall in the books that there's a whole sequence where Rand sponsors a series of non-channeler great thinkers (scientists and philosophers) in Cairhien. While ostensibly he's doing it simply to improve the world, the plot purpose of this school of his is twofold - it (censored). The fact that mundane philosophy is the source of both of these solutions is yet more proof that using the One Power is a function of mind and psychology rather than body/genitalia.

Ahh.. as such its not proof of anything. At least not in regard to channel Saidar/Saidin.
I mean yes directing your channeling ability is a function of your mind. Thats not a big revelation. We got a lot of cat/mouse fights between channelers who were decided by someone being more devious.
So yes a non-channeler philosofer can of course provide inspiration.

What Psyco said. As for why that implication is itself a problem - I added the Giant's quote to my extended sig, but my understanding is that you don't agree with it. That's fine, but I'm not sure I'm any better equipped to explain the fundamental underlying issue than he did, so we may be at an impasse here then. You say so what, I point to that, you say so what, etc.

Nah that quote "But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?"
Is quite good. Though i would have respected it more without a name assigned to it. I have an instinctive dislike for trying to make words look more important by attaching an important name to them.

Anyway, still dont see the relevant of that quote, since its indeed what im already doing?
Im not complaining about the text. Im the one debating against the majority of changes proposed.

I'd like to step away from the representation side of things for a moment to ask a tangential question.

What evidence do we have that trans people don't exist in the Wheel of Time world? Channelers are already a tiny portion of the population - a fraction of one percent if we go by the number of Aes Sedai compared to normals. Yes, there are more channelers than the Aes Sedai realized but even then it was still a tiny number of people. The amount of men that can channel is even smaller thanks to the Red Ajah.

That leaves you with a small fraction of the population (transgender people) crossing with a second tiny fraction of the population (channelers), and then having to meet further requirements like being strong enough to be noticed. Compounding on that we have medieval discrimination towards both groups.

But wait, it gets worse. A trans channeler would be forced to hide their ability no matter what. If they present as male, that gets them lynched and likely on an Aes Sedai hit list. If they present as female they're channeling Saidin and have going crazy to worry about.

For a trans channeler to be noted in the story, they have to meet some pretty stringent criteria.

A good point made by Rodin, and reason enough i think to simply shelve the entire subject, and allow people to make up their own headcanon and fanfiction on the subject.

Sex, like all human biology is simple. You have either two X chromosomes (female) or an X and a Y chromosome (male). Case closed. Except...

Yes. Case closed indeed. Am absolutely not going to bother about delving into chromosome errors in a fantasy discussion on the internet.

[Traab]

The post rodin made, just wanted to add something to the idea that there are trans channelers we dont know about. Its hardly unheard of in real world history for someone, primarily a woman, to be discovered as such after a lifetime of pretending to be male in a men only field. There have been women doctors who were believed to be men all their life because women arent allowed to be doctors so they hid it. You could also toss mulan in there for a somewhat more topical comparison. So its entirely possible that there are "wisewomen" out there with the ability to channel who secretly pee standing up, or chiefs who cant write their name in the snow, and they just dont get caught, or they dont get talked about when they do.

All that being said, I really dont like the entire focus of this argument. If you want to write wheel of time fanfiction where the gender you identify as controls what part of the power you can use, go right ahead, I can suggest a few sites out there you can submit it too, and i would probably give it a good read as that could make for an interesting alternate universe story, but you cant change the entire freaking story, the fundamental pillars of its world building, and pretend that its an "adaptation" If the point is that the series would be problematic on a more visible level due to some of its underlying themes thats a fine thing to debate about and is certainly good for discussion, but all this talk about "All you have to do is change basically everything that makes the series what it is and now its ok to put on the air" and well, thats just a bridge too far imo. Its like saying, "Lets have a LOTR tv series, only, its set in the year 2525 and frodo is a young hacker who got ahold of Sauron Incs source code. Also his name is mitch"

[Ramza00]

Posts this again for it is relevant.

https://youtu.be/XJhOpY7bh6s



Art is good or bad in a subjective manner. We have internal frameworks we use to describe it on aesthetically pleasing or not pleasing. Furthermore aesthetics is not a single thing, for example I can find something repulsing while simultaneously adoring it for it challenges my preconceptions.

Even though whether art is good or bad is subjective, humans have lots of similarities to one another, and even enjoying art can be a social act and thus interpretative communities arise where one has a similar internal framework in which to judge art.

These interpretative communities due to how social they are, and how passionate people can be with things they care about can become very tribalistic.

—————

We can not prejudge whether a recreation or a new art that was inspired by a predecessor can be good or not. This is because art is more than the sum of its parts.

One interpretative community style likes very little to be changed in a recreation to remain truthful to the original. But what is truthful is subjective and one must experience the final product to have the full experience. Sometimes things need to be change to take advantage of the various different strengths and weaknesses of the medium. Books are different than movies, movies from tv shows, hell even a 3.5 hour movie is different than two 105 minute movies. Sure the film lengths are the same, but things are more than the sums of their parts and you can not just recombine or split two things and yield the exact same effect for pacing and tension are two traits of art that are subjective and are critical important to the experience of art.

—————

Robert Jordan, which is not actually his real name, instead being a pen name borrowed For Whom the Bell Toll an Ernest Hemingway novel...

Well he has commented that things would have to be adapted if there ever was a tv show. RJ was at peace with this, he wanted a project and he understood changes would have to be made if the project were to occur. It would no longer be purely RJ’s vision.

Furthermore people were in talks with RJ for making a tv series for decades such as RJ selling the tv rights in 2000 (so between books 8 and 9 out of 14) only for the tv rights to return to RJ for the show went into developmental hell and they expired, and part of the contract was the rights returning to RJ in that scenario.

In 2004, RJ sold the rights again to Red Eagle Entertainment for $640k. The rights were for a movie, tv, and/or video games during a 11 year window. A horrible video game was produced. A movie was going to occur but did not due to developmental hell. Then a tv show was going to happen but did not due to developmental hell.

So in 2015 the rights was supposed to go back to RJ and his estate (he died 2007, the last book co-authored with a new author Brandon Sanderson came out in 2013.) But Red Eagle Entertainment still had things in production and it was arguable who had legal rights in this scenario based on the metrics of the 2004 contract. In 2016 RJ’s estate announced they had settled and come to a mutual understanding with rights.

In 2018 Amazon announced it was making a Wheel of Time TV show.

RJ knee things would be changed if something were to occur. He also wanted generally for something to occur, and he was well paid in his life when he sold the rights for tv, movie, and video game (the video game is bad and it disregards the series lore.)

There is no right or wrong way to do this, only an aesthetically pleasing or not pleasing way. That will be subjective, that will not be able to be judge till we experience the final product.

We of course can have opinions, but we are prejudging the product before it happens. We are bringing our “prejudices” with us!

[Psyren]

All that being said, I really dont like the entire focus of this argument. If you want to write wheel of time fanfiction where the gender you identify as controls what part of the power you can use, go right ahead, I can suggest a few sites out there you can submit it too, and i would probably give it a good read as that could make for an interesting alternate universe story, but you cant change the entire freaking story, the fundamental pillars of its world building, and pretend that its an "adaptation."

To repeat myself yet again - there are options besides tying saidin/saidar to gender at all. Those options don't even have to be known for the majority of the story, leaving many of the existing beats unchanged.

Ahh.. as such its not proof of anything. At least not in regard to channel Saidar/Saidin.
I mean yes directing your channeling ability is a function of your mind. Thats not a big revelation. We got a lot of cat/mouse fights between channelers who were decided by someone being more devious.
So yes a non-channeler philosofer can of course provide inspiration.

But how do you not see then that differentiating channeling by gender is akin to differentiating minds by gender? Especially when it comes to aspects like differences in strength and control and capability, that's a really bizarre message for a work to be delivering, whether it is wholly unintentional or Mr. Jordan's own beliefs. That is why an adaptation would be obligated to, if not change it outright, at the very least tone it down or leave some of those aspects vague/unstated.

As one example - "Women are weaker than men" is unnecessary, when "these women are weaker than these men" accomplishes the same plot objective without the arbitrary generalization.

Yes. Case closed indeed. Am absolutely not going to bother about delving into chromosome errors in a fantasy discussion on the internet.

You're proving my point here - the mere fact that you unquestioningly describe variations/permutations in chromosomal expression as "errors" is the very problem that this aspect of the story is reinforcing - consciously or not. Anyone doing an adaptation of the story today would do well to put more thought into this aspect of the story than the original author did.

Nah that quote "But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?"
Is quite good. Though i would have respected it more without a name assigned to it. I have an instinctive dislike for trying to make words look more important by attaching an important name to them.

Anyway, still dont see the relevant of that quote, since its indeed what im already doing?
Im not complaining about the text. Im the one debating against the majority of changes proposed.

Not that one, the one in my extended sig (was too big for the regular one.)

[Dragonus45]

To repeat myself yet again - there are options besides tying saidin/saidar to gender at all. Those options don't even have to be known for the majority of the story, leaving many of the existing beats unchanged.

At that point though, you are changing something so fundamental to the nature of the work and the bedrock of the story that it may not even qualify as being Wheel it Time any more. And likely still leaving in some sizable plot holes beside.

[dancrilis]

Those options don't even have to be known for the majority of the story, leaving many of the existing beats unchanged.

So you create a show which seems to be what most would consider faithful to the magic system of the novels - annoying everyone who thinks sex based magic sends a bad message - and then in season ~10 switch it up, likely creating new issues as you do?

What's the point?

[Psyren]

At that point though, you are changing something so fundamental to the nature of the work and the bedrock of the story that it may not even qualify as being Wheel it Time any more. And likely still leaving in some sizable plot holes beside.

I disagree.

So you create a show which seems to be what most would consider faithful to the magic system of the novels - annoying everyone who thinks sex based magic sends a bad message - and then in season ~10 switch it up, likely creating new issues as you do?

What's the point?

How a story concludes, and the ultimate theme/thesis statement it was building towards, matters. One look at stories like The Matrix, Mass Effect, and the most comparable example (Game of Thrones) will tell you that.

[Mightymosy]

What I would do:
[...]
- Get rid of all the extraneous female nudity (eg, there's no reason for the women to take their shirts off when voting for a new Amyrlin Seat).
- Add enough gay men to balance out all the gay women.
- Maybe cast some trans women to play Aes Sedai? I'm not sure about that.
[...]

Dear lord, I completely forgot the Mat/Tylin "relationship" Yeah, that one definitely needs to be reworked - it's incredibly toxic, so at a minimum that fact needs to be acknowledged by the work instead of being treated as comic relief.[...]

Let's turn this around. There are existing cast whose sexuality doesn't come up at all, like Logain. What would it detract or bloat to simply give them one? It wouldn't need more than a few lines of dialogue, perhaps even a knowing glance between him and someone else, and bam, mission accomplished. (Though I certainly wouldn't mind an on-screen kiss.)

Now I have only ever heard of Wheel of Time, and never read it.

Now that I have read this thread, I must say these are probably the only aspects of it that might have gotten my interest, to read that series. So I wonder why would you change those?

I mean, some magic powers that is divided into two halves bla bla bla is such more different than any other magic system ever described bla bla bla bla bla......I mean, come on, is that really THAT interesting????
If I am interested in magic systems, I re-read the Comprehensive Rules for Magic the Gathering, or articles on how fith edition D&D is so much dfferent to 4th edition, and how 6th edition will likely changed everything and make it more like the spirit of what 2nd edition promised or whatever yadda yadda yadda.

Seriously. When I read fantasy, I want fantasy. So I wonder if cutting out stuff some people like is a good way to go.



1. Remove female nudity?
Why, the heck, why? To make it less interesting?
2. Add gay men? Yeah, that sounds more reasonable! I personally don't care, but if you want to create a work that appeals to a mre diverse audience, enter stuff that excites more people, don't cut out stuff that already proved that it drew people in!
3. Cast Trans women?
Hell yeah. Make them look awesome to draw attention to how they can be awesome, even to people who are not aware. Or make them everyday persons, to show that they are everyday persons, so that everday trans people can associate with them and feel represented.
I am all for exploring new ideas if it serves a good purpose.
4. Mat/Tylin: I quickly googled it and (correct me if wrong) Tylin is some hot chick queen who "rapes" Mat, but since she is hot it is played as comic relief and he falls in love with her.
Why would you cut that out??? You realise that rape fantasies are an actual thing, right? One certain American lady earned millions selling a book series (and movie) on the basis of rape fantasies, and men have those as well. It is a known trope character for a reason.
Again, this is supposed a fantasy story, is it not?
I do not endorse non-consensual sex in any way, shape or form, but if you are talking about fantasy novels, you have to consider them as such, and consider what your audience wants to read.
(at any rate, people all over the world devour this awful game of throne series, and it has things WAAAAAY more disgusting than rape. Tells you some lessons about people, I say))
5. Yeah for on-screen kisses! Modern movies have way too few awesome kiss scenes!
My favourite scene in OotS is Elan kissing Sabine, it is such perfectly orchestrated. Why can't writers not write more things like that?

Considering you are a proponent of the whole non-hetero-sex thing: I can't remember ever seeing a gay kiss in mainstream cinema or even TV or even series. Not a single one. Don't really care personally to watch it, being hetero myself, but if you want audience money, why NOT show it???
Do we all accidentally turn gay if we watch gay persons kiss? Is that the fear? Silly producers, I tell ya.

[Rynjin]

1. Remove female nudity?
Why, the heck, why? To make it less interesting?

Pointless female nudity, I believe was the phrasing. Trust me, there's plenty of sex and nudity in the series that serves a purpose, but the meetings in the Tower where everyone just sits around shirtless to "prove their femininity" didn't really add anything to what was going on.

3. Cast Trans women?
Hell yeah. Make them look awesome to draw attention to how they can be awesome, even to people who are not aware. Or make them everyday persons, to show that they are everyday persons, so that everday trans people can associate with them and feel represented.
I am all for exploring new ideas if it serves a good purpose.

Could work. The sticking point in the discussion is how it works with the magic system if you try to introduce trans Aes Sedai specifically, which you stated you do not care about, but is the most important thing about the series and is interwoven into nearly every aspect of the plot and worldbuilding. The REASON most societies are matriarchal is because of the gender segregated magic system. The reason the main character IS the main character is in large part due to the gender segregated magic system. The reason many of the events of all 14 novels even happen in the first place is because of the gender segregated magic system.

You can't change that without gutting the entire series. And, to be clear, a lot of people like Wheel of Time because of its worldbuilding and magic.

A bafflingly large portion of this thread seems to be people arguing about the merits of changing a piece of media they've never experienced in the first place. I don't understand the appeal.

4. Mat/Tylin: I quickly googled it and (correct me if wrong) Tylin is some hot chick queen who "rapes" Mat, but since she is hot it is played as comic relief and he falls in love with her.
Why would you cut that out??? You realise that rape fantasies are an actual thing, right? One certain American lady earned millions selling a book series (and movie) on the basis of rape fantasies, and men have those as well. It is a known trope character for a reason.
Again, this is supposed a fantasy story, is it not?
I do not endorse non-consensual sex in any way, shape or form, but if you are talking about fantasy novels, you have to consider them as such, and consider what your audience wants to read.
(at any rate, people all over the world devour this awful game of throne series, and it has things WAAAAAY more disgusting than rape. Tells you some lessons about people, I say))

Yeah...no.

Let me put it this way. Even if you take that extremely shallow approach to it, it doesn't really work. I read Crown of Swords when I was about 14 to 15 years old; i.e. at my most horny.

I still found it creepy and weird.

5. Yeah for on-screen kisses! Modern movies have way too few awesome kiss scenes!
My favourite scene in OotS is Elan kissing Sabine, it is such perfectly orchestrated. Why can't writers not write more things like that?

Considering you are a proponent of the whole non-hetero-sex thing: I can't remember ever seeing a gay kiss in mainstream cinema or even TV or even series. Not a single one. Don't really care personally to watch it, being hetero myself, but if you want audience money, why NOT show it???
Do we all accidentally turn gay if we watch gay persons kiss? Is that the fear? Silly producers, I tell ya.

There's plenty in mainstream, but you generally won't see it on network tv; you need cable or Netflix for it. At least for gay as in men kissing; I can think of plenty lesbian examples.

[Seppl]

Pointless female nudity, I believe was the phrasing. Trust me, there's plenty of sex and nudity in the series that serves a purpose, but the meetings in the Tower where everyone just sits around shirtless to "prove their femininity" didn't really add anything to what was going on.

The in-story justification is actually closely related to the question posed in this thread: The Aes Sedai are so fanatically female-only that for all their most secret rites and meetings they have to prove to each other beyond any doubt, that only women are present. Which would be a problem with the proposed changes in this thread. It feels like they would have to become a generic magic school for Saidar users for the world building to make sense. This despite the Aes Sedai order, and its fanatical focus on women, being a big deal in the books and a major driver of the plot.

Of course, I realize that these scenes are also included because the author was a dirty old man. One only has to look at the sheer abundance of nudity of the (mostly young and beautiful) female cast members throughout the books. But in most cases it also serves as important world-building. In this case to inform the reader just how deep the women-only sentiment is built into the very foundations of the Aes Sedai order, and the motivations and world-view of many of its members.

[Rodin]

Pointless female nudity, I believe was the phrasing. Trust me, there's plenty of sex and nudity in the series that serves a purpose, but the meetings in the Tower where everyone just sits around shirtless to "prove their femininity" didn't really add anything to what was going on.

I've always found how the series handled nudity, sex, and violence to be pretty bizarre. The books don't shy away from violence at all - there's fountains of gore, graphic depictions of badly burned people, and decapitations galore. Nudity is similarly unrestrained. There's a lot of naked people of both genders in the series, and it's often treated quite casually.

But sex? Sex is portrayed at a TV friendly level. People will start tearing each other's clothes off, then the scene fades to black. The infamous Tylin scene happens off camera, as do Rand's various trysts. Faile getting tied up naked in the middle of the Aiel camp doesn't warrant the same treatment because...reasons.

A theoretical TV adaptation could go either way with it. There's very little plot-based nudity that cannot be removed. Nynaeve being naked for her Accepted trial is one, since it's deeply symbolic. Aviendha taking off naked through the snow is another. I struggle to think of any apart from that, assuming that sequences like Faile's captivity get cut for other reasons (like the audience's sanity). Both could be handled tastefully.

On the other side there's the Game of Thrones treatment. There's a lot of exposition doled out in the Aiel sweat tents, and "sexposition" appears to have worked well for that series. It also doesn't stop you from removing anything they consider unnecessary. Game of Thrones removed a number of sex scenes that added nothing to the plot.

[Ramza00]

1. Remove female nudity?
Why, the heck, why? To make it less interesting?

The female nudity being referred to is only among women, has no sex, and is a fraternity / sorority ritual involving magic.

What is the line from the Terry Pratchet / Neil Gaiman book again?

• “Most books on witchcraft will tell you that witches work naked. This is because most books on witchcraft are written by men.”

Lots of White Tower stuff seems obvious from a meta level that it was written by a man. Tribal bickering, humiliation hazing rituals involving chores, people defer to one another with one power arm wrestling contests instead of turns, seniority, democracy, etc. Yadda, yadda, yadda.

[Caledonian]

Diane Duane wrote a series of books called "The Tale of the Five", starting with The Door Into Fire, and the series is noted for being positive towards alternate sexualities.

But she has the same element: men can't use the Fire (let's just say magic, because it's complicated) because a cosmic entity went evil eons ago. Only women can focus and channel this potent and divine magic. Until one man thinks he can manage it, and the entity comes a-callin'...

[Rynjin]

The in-story justification is actually closely related to the question posed in this thread: The Aes Sedai are so fanatically female-only that for all their most secret rites and meetings they have to prove to each other beyond any doubt, that only women are present. Which would be a problem with the proposed changes in this thread. It feels like they would have to become a generic magic school for Saidar users for the world building to make sense. This despite the Aes Sedai order, and its fanatical focus on women, being a big deal in the books and a major driver of the plot.

Of course, I realize that these scenes are also included because the author was a dirty old man. One only has to look at the sheer abundance of nudity of the (mostly young and beautiful) female cast members throughout the books. But in most cases it also serves as important world-building. In this case to inform the reader just how deep the women-only sentiment is built into the very foundations of the Aes Sedai order, and the motivations and world-view of many of its members.

Yeah, sure, but you know there's one other indisputable piece of proof that they're women: they can wield Saidar. It's silly.

[Psyren]

I wouldn't mind gratuitous nudity if it were on both sides. There are no male Aiel having to strip down to prove themselves while training. Asha'man don't flash each other to prove they haven't been infiltrated, and there is no stripping when they go from Soldier to Dedicated to Asha'man. Female da'covale robes are sheer to the point of nothingness (and boy does the book never cease to let you know that) while that of the dudes appears to be opaque (e.g. Huan's was just normal yellow. The agenda there is pretty clear.

[Rynjin]

I wouldn't mind gratuitous nudity if it were on both sides. There are no male Aiel having to strip down to prove themselves while training. Asha'man don't flash each other to prove they haven't been infiltrated, and there is no stripping when they go from Soldier to Dedicated to Asha'man. Female da'covale robes are sheer to the point of nothingness (and boy does the book never cease to let you know that) while that of the dudes appears to be opaque (e.g. Huan's was just normal yellow. The agenda there is pretty clear.

I think there's at least one scene of Lan beefcake, but yeah it's pretty few and far between.

[Man on Fire]

Spoiler: Gender portrayal problems

Show

- There are "male" and "female" halves to the One Power. Even beyond their biology or outward presentation, a channeler's very soul can only ever be one or the other, and that determines which of the two halves they can access.

- The male side, or at least the average male channeler, is inherently stronger. The books use the analogy of upper body strength to try and explain this arbitrary difference, even though channeling and musculature are completely unrelated.

- For some arbitrary reason, men are stronger at using the elements Earth and Fire, while women are stronger with Air and Water.

- Women can link their powers to channel cooperatively up to a point, but then they need men to go beyond a certain number - because reasons. Men on their own meanwhile can't channel cooperatively in any number at all, ever, unless a woman is there to link them - once again, because reasons.

- The only source of power available to all genders equally is inherently evil to access and controlled exclusively by the Big Bad evil deity - who himself is coded male. It is in fact attempting to overcome the gender binary that serves as the inciting incident for all the show's evil in the first place.

- The Red Ajah are a fairly complex set of initial antagonists - or at least they should be. They perform a tragically necessary function (neutralizing saidin channelers before they inevitably go insane and cause mass destruction) and get demonized for it, but prior to the later books in the series they are almost universally portrayed as little more than man-haters who are more prone to corruption than other channelers. They also have a high proportion of lesbians in their ranks, because of course they do.

- Expression and sexuality in general are touchy subjects in these books. There are lesbians and bisexual girls all over the place - fairly understandable given the setup - but gay men are practically nonexistent, and our one example of a trans(?) character, on top of being portrayed as an aberration in the setting as a whole, serves merely to reinforce the gender binary rather than challenge it.

There is so much YIKES under this spoiler and every paragraph somehow gets worse that I would probably consider adapting something else. Even my pure disgust aside, this sounds like fixing it is more work than it's worth.

[druid91]

I honestly don't see a need nor point to rewrite a series to fit with modern gender morality, nor do I see the westworld example as particularly relevant to this particular discussion.

Westworld took a monster movie and twisted it into something different. Nice.

You're trying to take Wheel of Time, (Which I'll admit to never having read nor particularly caring about.) and rewrite it not because it's initial incarnation was particularly bad. But because it's magic system has unfortunate implications towards modern perceptions of gender.

There's a lot of series that have unfortunate implications towards all kinds of things. Avatar has fully functional Eugenics, where your heritage literally determines the kinds of super powers you get (Despite that power not even being genetic in nature.) and certain types of powers are only enabled by certain specific mixtures of heritage or through particularly 'pure' genetics. That doesn't stop anyone from having fun with the show about the people using elemental kung-fu to fight each other.

Star Wars implies that literally having emotional attachments to things and people will inevitably turn you evil. Better not love your mom or else you might turn into a sadistic space dictator!

Harry Potter has the utterly abysmal attitude of even the 'good' wizards towards muggles, treating them much more akin to pets than people unless they happen to luck into giving birth to a muggleborn. And the fact that the world has gotten even more ridiculously and pointlessly dark with the Fantastic Beasts series. "It's totally ok to just mind-wipe people at random if they don't have magic!"

[Rynjin]

Harry Potter has the utterly abysmal attitude of even the 'good' wizards towards muggles, treating them much more akin to pets than people unless they happen to luck into giving birth to a muggleborn. And the fact that the world has gotten even more ridiculously and pointlessly dark with the Fantastic Beasts series. "It's totally ok to just mind-wipe people at random if they don't have magic!"

TBF I'm not sure if that's more dark than the actual series; they memory charm people constantly in the main series and I think it IS referenced at least once that such charms used to have even looser regulations.

[druid91]

TBF I'm not sure if that's more dark than the actual series; they memory charm people constantly in the main series and I think it IS referenced at least once that such charms used to have even looser regulations.

To be honest, the darkness I was talking about in Fantastic Beasts was

Spoiler: Spoilers

Show

The Acid Dementors with the tearfully happy assistants weeping at how beautiful it was to feed someone to what appears to be a sentient, malevolent, pit of acid. The scene where they casually talk about ripping out Grindelwalds tongue (Despite mental casting existing and presumably being something Grindelwald one of the greatest wizards of his age could do.) And also basically everything to do with Creedence. Also to a slightly lesser, excessively melodramatic degree, Leta Lestrange.

[Psyren]

Avatar has fully functional Eugenics, where your heritage literally determines the kinds of super powers you get (Despite that power not even being genetic in nature.)

...I'm guessing you haven't gotten around to Legend of Korra yet, in addition to skipping Wheel of Time

Star Wars implies that literally having emotional attachments to things and people will inevitably turn you evil. Better not love your mom or else you might turn into a sadistic space dictator!

Isn't this weird rule explicitly one of the things Disney committed to changing? Good riddance I say.

Harry Potter has the utterly abysmal attitude of even the 'good' wizards towards muggles, treating them much more akin to pets than people unless they happen to luck into giving birth to a muggleborn. And the fact that the world has gotten even more ridiculously and pointlessly dark with the Fantastic Beasts series. "It's totally ok to just mind-wipe people at random if they don't have magic!"

Fantastic Beasts is a garbage cashgrab anyway, of course it's awful.

None of your examples work as counterarguments.

[druid91]

...I'm guessing you haven't gotten around to Legend of Korra yet, in addition to skipping Wheel of Time



Isn't this weird rule explicitly one of the things Disney committed to changing? Good riddance I say.



Fantastic Beasts is a garbage cashgrab anyway, of course it's awful.

None of your examples work as counterarguments.

Legend of Korra cemented the weird Eugenics, It didn't contradict them. You could use the new air benders as counterexamples, but given ALL bending was given to people by spiritual powers in the past there's no reason to expect the new air nation is any different. The fact remains that if your literal bloodline determines what bending you can possibly get barring literal divine intervention.

Disney's new canon is barely coherent enough to be called a story. I would hesitate to try and draw meaningful analysis from a story told by someone who doesn't remember their own story. Nor would I go to them as a shining example of how to correct past mistakes.


And again, Fantastic beasts is merely additional to the outright awful treatment of Muggles in the original Harry Potter.

Each of these series have their unfortunate implications, attempting to spit shine them defeats the purpose of fiction entirely.

[Psyren]

Legend of Korra cemented the weird Eugenics, It didn't contradict them.

Except it did - the type of bending you get is no longer dependent on a specific bloodline or tribe. Open and shut, change to the magic system to remove unfortunate implications.

Disney's new canon is barely coherent enough to be called a story.

There are plenty of other threads to relitigate new Star Wars in; my point is that the specific deficiency of their magic system that you're complaining about is being changed, so they actually agree with you.

And again, Fantastic beasts is merely additional to the outright awful treatment of Muggles in the original Harry Potter.

This is unrelated to the magic system regardless of which HP franchise you mean.