Modernizing the Wheel of Time

[Traab]

"The work should reinforce 1990 views on gender science" = "pro-diversity" is... a take, I suppose.



Having or not having a cervix is not a "limitation," and has nothing to do with either gender nor the Wheel of Time.



Except they were doing all kinds of things wrong for 50,000 years, so this can be one more. Healing Severance is new this Age; so is coercive linking by non-(taught)-channelers, and so is safe unweaving. These aren't issues with specific weaves, these are fundamental laws (or at least, what the AoL thought were fundamental laws, only to be proven wrong) of the Power itself.

They were accepted as the way things worked, and until nyeaneave showed up, they were, but her figuring out how to do it anyway doesnt bring into question the entire magic system and the world that has been built specifically on how things work. You are comparing something that nobody tried to do with something that, assuming your version of how the magic system should work, would have been discovered ages ago simply by accident because, again, wilders start channeling the power without knowing what it is, what they are doing, or how it works, and they always, ALWAYS choose the same power source as literally every other member of their gender that channels. If women could access the male half or vice versa it would have happened before the events of the story because thats as fundamental of an issue as gravity meaning things fall down only to discover that every now and then, they actually go sideways. Eventually someone is going to notice things falling sideways under the right circumstances.

That being said, you COULD patch that plot hole up, but thats just one of a dozen or more that are actually fairly important to the story and world building that you would have to come up with an excuse for, or rewrite the story to push aside or cover up till your big "Aha!" moment. Your idea just doesnt fit the setting and would necessitate altering a VAST amount of the story, its world building, and its themes, to make it work.

[Psyren]

That being said, you COULD patch that plot hole up, but thats just one of a dozen or more that are actually fairly important to the story and world building that you would have to come up with an excuse for, or rewrite the story to push aside or cover up till your big "Aha!" moment. Your idea just doesnt fit the setting and would necessitate altering a VAST amount of the story, its world building, and its themes, to make it work.

The Age of Legends not realizing something isn't a "plot hole" - there are other plenty of other things they didn't know besides the three examples I gave, like their abysmal weather control, or the existence of forkroot. (Forkroot affecting both saidar and saidin users equally is a particularly interesting point, come to think of it.)

[Mightymosy]

"The work should reinforce 1990 views on gender science" = "pro-diversity" is... a take, I suppose.



Having or not having a cervix is not a "limitation," and has nothing to do with either gender nor the Wheel of Time.



Except they were doing all kinds of things wrong for 50,000 years, so this can be one more. Healing Severance is new this Age; so is coercive linking by non-(taught)-channelers, and so is safe unweaving. These aren't issues with specific weaves, these are fundamental laws (or at least, what the AoL thought were fundamental laws, only to be proven wrong) of the Power itself.

Not having a Cervix is a pretty big limitation to giving birth, I would say.
Having one is a big condition for getting cervix cancer, so biology dictates your life to an extent.

That's why I was ASKING YOU what you think WOT had as a message.
Because Magic limitations COULD be intended as metaphors, for example.

Man, this is frustrating, and I am even on your side, in spirit.

[lord_khaine]

Overall, a lot of the book is about how thinking can get you much further than just being large and/or strong. Not a bad message for a childrens' book, I might add. And Bilbo is the representation of that way of problem-solving. Since the movies skip all of the "boring" thinking and solve everything by fighting, Bilbo becomes superfluous.

Ahem, sorry, got carried away into a bit of a rant there.
To circle back to the actual topic of the thread, don't change fundamental parts of the story just because you think it's what the audience wants to see. If you don't like the source material, find one that fits what you want better.

Oh yeah, this is two incredibly good points about the hobbit as well. I likely overlooked that myself because i was busy being annoyed at the Legolas insertion :D
Thumbs up for the importance of the clever thinking message.

Having or not having a cervix is not a "limitation," and has nothing to do with either gender nor the Wheel of Time.

Not having it is certainly a limitation if you want a child (edit. Ninajed by Mm, thats what i get for typing slowly!)
And it does in fact have something to do with gender, depending on if you go for it being a biological or a mental construct.
Since there is a massive debate raging around the gender-locked access to Saidon/Saidar, then it is relevant for the Wheel of Time.

Except they were doing all kinds of things wrong for 50,000 years, so this can be one more. Healing Severance is new this Age; so is coercive linking by non-(taught)-channelers, and so is safe unweaving. These aren't issues with specific weaves, these are fundamental laws (or at least, what the AoL thought were fundamental laws, only to be proven wrong) of the Power itself.

.. this is more of the "my gender-neutral channeling can fit lorewise because the age of legend people didnt know what they were doing" ?
I confess i kinda stayed out of that part of the debate because it did not seem relevant to me.
But i will point out, that i dont think any of those qualify for a fundemental law.
Stuff like for example.. safe unweaving i would liken to discovering the 4rth state of matter (gas, fluid, solid, plasma).
Where the Saidin/Saidar difference i would liken to one of the 3 laws of physics.

The Age of Legends not realizing something isn't a "plot hole" - there are other plenty of other things they didn't know besides the three examples I gave, like their abysmal weather control, or the existence of forkroot. (Forkroot affecting both saidar and saidin users equally is a particularly interesting point, come to think of it.)

What abysmal weather control? they invented the field. Controlled their weather with tearangrel. They had better weather control than anyone else.
And we dont know Forkroot existed back in the age of legend.

[Psyren]

Not having a Cervix is a pretty big limitation to giving birth, I would say.

Not having it is certainly a limitation if you want a child.

Ah, but it's not. There are other ways to have children.
And if you're implying that those other ways are inherently less valuable - that's exactly the kind of thinking that deserves examination, rather than being thoughtlessly reinforced by adapting a 1990 work of fiction unchanged

Man, this is frustrating, and I am even on your side, in spirit.

Judging by your posts so far I'm not at all sure we are, but okay.

Stuff like for example.. safe unweaving i would liken to discovering the 4rth state of matter (gas, fluid, solid, plasma).
Where the Saidin/Saidar difference i would liken to one of the 3 laws of physics.

You mean the laws that we're still discovering new things about even today, and that don't always apply at the quantum level? I think there's plenty of room to insert a glimmer of hope, if not a changed conclusion outright.

[Mightymosy]

Ah, but it's not. There are other ways to have children.
And if you're implying that those other ways are inherently less valuable - that's exactly the kind of thinking that deserves examination, rather than being thoughtlessly reinforced by adapting a 1990 work of fiction unchanged



Judging by your posts so far I'm not at all sure we are, but okay.



You mean the laws that we're still discovering new things about even today, and that don't always apply at the quantum level? I think there's plenty of room to insert a glimmer of hope, if not a changed conclusion outright.

OK you tell me how you give birth without a cervix. Naturally.


I didn't write whether any was more valuable than any other, I was talking about Viability and a message to readers how coping with what's possible and what not might be a good message of a work.
And again, I WAS ASKING YOU what you think WoT's message was in that regard.



Also, when did I write that third paragraph???
Can't remember

[Psyren]

OK you tell me how you give birth without a cervix. Naturally.

I didn't say you could. But using terms with an inherently negative connotation (like "limitation") is a mindset that fiction can be used to effectively challenge, or at the very least avoid reinforcing.

What abysmal weather control? they invented the field. Controlled their weather with tearangrel. They had better weather control than anyone else.
And we dont know Forkroot existed back in the age of legend.

1) Moridin notes that the channelers of this age can manipulate weather without such ter'angreal to an extent that were impossible to his time (which he believed to be "the pinnacle of civilization").

2) It didn't, the Forsaken were as surprised by it as everyone else (Moghedien in particular).

I love how people who have not read the series has opinions on modernizing it or not. They assume it is either benign or it is horrid, but how would they know?

They are literally being prejudicial with prejudging a work they do not know.

I've noticed that

Sidenote who is going to make the thread on what should be modernized or keep the series perfectly intact for the Dune series?

I've got my hands full here I think.

[Mightymosy]

I didn't say you could. But using terms with an inherently negative connotation (like "limitation") is a mindset that fiction can be used to effectively challenge, or at the very least avoid reinforcing.



1) Moridin notes that the channelers of this age can manipulate weather without such ter'angreal to an extent that were impossible to his time (which he believed to be "the pinnacle of civilization").

2) It didn't, the Forsaken were as surprised by it as everyone else (Moghedien in particular).



I've noticed that



I've got my hands full here I think.

OK, last attempt, since you don't seem to want to answer.

Fiction might also try to teach how you can *cope* with a limitation. You know, a limitation you cannot overcome.
That's why I asked you about WoT's message

Limitations don't go away just because we pretend they don't exist.

Change the things you can, accept the things you can't change, and know the difference. Or some such.

[Psyren]

Fiction might also try to teach how you can *cope* with a limitation. You know, a limitation you cannot overcome.
That's why I asked you about WoT's message

Limitations don't go away just because we pretend they don't exist.

What is the value in pretending that a gender binary is such a limitation? What lessons does that magic system teach that are relevant when the book is closed?

[dancrilis]

That's why I asked you about WoT's message

Since I don't think you are getting an answer elsewhere I will I will try to answer this.

Wheel of Time's Message: People are different from each other, that doesn't mean that they are evil, misunderstandings can have terrible consequences, working together can have wonderous results.

Biological sex is the difference that was used to demonstrate this - and that difference is so crucial to everything in the setting that it cannot be altered without altering the setting entirely.

[Anteros]

What is the value in pretending that a gender binary is such a limitation? What lessons does that magic system teach that are relevant when the book is closed?

It doesn't matter. Even if you're 100% right and everyone agrees with you it doesn't matter. It's not what the work is about.

No one wants to replace their beloved work of fiction with your bad, politically charged fan-fiction. Just stop.

[Psyren]

It doesn't matter.

That would be where we appear to fundamentally disagree, yes.

[Rynjin]

I didn't say you could. But using terms with an inherently negative connotation (like "limitation") is a mindset that fiction can be used to effectively challenge, or at the very least avoid reinforcing.

Sometimes things are negative, chief. Not having a body part necessary to do something is a limitation, that is simply a fact.

Unless you're going to seriously argue that not having hands isn't a limitation because you can ask someone else to carry your stuff.

[Ramza00]

Sidenote who is going to make the thread on what should be modernized or keep the series perfectly intact for the Dune series?

I've got my hands full here I think.

You need to grasp Saidan with both hands and "Seize it" push yourself to your limits and do the Spice Agony

It doesn't matter. Even if you're 100% right and everyone agrees with you it doesn't matter. It's not what the work is about.

No one wants to replace their beloved work of fiction with your bad, politically charged fan-fiction. Just stop.

Why are you using universalizing language? You do not speak for everyone, so why are you saying No One wants this? Hell the length of this thread is proof against you Anteros.

----

Who made you the arbitrator that gets to decide?

[dancrilis]

No one wants to replace their beloved work of fiction with your bad, politically charged fan-fiction.

You do not speak for everyone, so why are you saying No One wants this?

...are you saying you do want to replace works of fiction that are beloved to you with bad, politically charged fan-fiction?

[Rodin]

Who says they didn't?

Source: http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Dwarf-women#cite_note-0
Citation on source: J.R.R. Tolkien, Christopher Tolkien (ed.), The War of the Jewels, "Part Two. The Later Quenta Silmarillion: Concerning the Dwarves (Chapter 13)"; a similar statement was made in The_Making_of_Appendix_A#Durin's_Folk

If you want to believe that some of the party are woman feel free - it would presumedly make no difference to casting, interactions etc.

Sure, you could do that. It misses the mark when it comes to visible and positive gender diversity though. A common complaint about female action leads is that the part is written for a man and then gender flipped without actually changing anything. A woman is allowed to be badass as long as she acts like a man. This is often an unintentional result of male writers trying to write a female role.

Making some of the dwarves female but never revealing that they are female doesn't actually help representation. 99.9999(repeating)% of the audience is going to assume these bearded dudes that look and act like men are, in fact, men.

And that's kind of the problem with Psyren's plan to reveal deep into the series that the Wheel of Time world is operating based on incorrect assumptions about gender roles and how the magic system works. If you're going to offend anyone, they've already stopped watching long before. Anyone still around by season 10 (or however deep you have to get to hit the later books) probably doesn't have an issue with how gender is portrayed in the books, or doesn't care sufficiently to care about fixing it for modern sensibilities.

If you're going to modernise Wheel of Time you either re-write it from scratch or leave it alone. There is no in-between. And if you're going to re-write it from scratch you might as well make your own fantasy world. With blackjack! And hookers!

[Ramza00]

...are you saying you do want to replace works of fiction that are beloved to you with bad, politically charged fan-fiction?

My own subjective opinions are my own. Trying to apply a universal principle does not work, Aristotle and other people got this with the idea of the golden mean, what is "excellent" / arete (which is translated into Latin as Virtue) is between two extremes. (For example the excellent idea of courage is not something that can be measured directly, instead you locate it between the extremes of being foolhardy and being a coward, sometimes finding excellence as an organizing principle is you recongize what can mess something up, what is too much or too little, and you find some mixture that is not excessive but also not deficient.) Creating art, or creating a good adaptation, well you can't prewrite what works and what doesn't.

You can't prejudge it, you watch the adaptation and say it works or it doesn't, and if it doesn't you can start to identify where the adaptation could have been improved. The Lord of the Rings movies generally work even if it has some flaws, etc, etc, then you can start identifying the small flaws.

That is the nature of all storytelling.

-----

But that is my own subjective opinion, I do not universalize it and say NO ONE wants this, I do not speak for everyone, never have, never will, and no humans ACTUALLY do. Yet some humans are hubristic.

[Psyren]

Sometimes things are negative, chief. Not having a body part necessary to do something is a limitation, that is simply a fact.

My forum handle is Psyren, not "chief."

And that's kind of the problem with Psyren's plan to reveal deep into the series that the Wheel of Time world is operating based on incorrect assumptions about gender roles and how the magic system works. If you're going to offend anyone, they've already stopped watching long before. Anyone still around by season 10 (or however deep you have to get to hit the later books) probably doesn't have an issue with how gender is portrayed in the books, or doesn't care sufficiently to care about fixing it for modern sensibilities.

That's the beauty of foreshadowing, you can insert it anywhere. It doesn't have to be paid off right away.

[Themrys]

Having or not having a cervix is not a "limitation," and has nothing to do with either gender nor the Wheel of Time.

You try bleeding on the bedclothes while on a school trip and having to confess that the mattress is ruined with your classmates listening, and I might consider your opinion on whether or not having a cervix is a limitation worth reading.


@Rodin: Actually, there is awesome fanfic where some or all of the dwarves in The Hobbit are female and Bilbo finds out at some point.

I would have loved them casting some of the dwarves as female. Hang some beards on them, never talk about it. (And Tauriel should have been more of a side character and leading a team that actually contains other female guards. My memory is fuzzy, but I think they were all men, she was just a token female character and I got the impression she wasn't there for representation even, but just so that the romance didn't have to be gay.)

[Rynjin]

My forum handle is Psyren, not "chief."

Cool. Interesting to note you didn't address the actual content of the post.

[Ramza00]

Cool. Interesting to note you didn't address the actual content of the post.

He replied with facts with another fact. Perhaps facts is all Pysren wanted to share or perhaps there is other fact-ors why he did not continue that line of thoughts. What fact-ors could those be?

[dancrilis]

My own subjective opinions are my own.

That is true (I hope), but doesn't answer the question of: do you want media beloved to you replaced with bad, policitically charged fan-fiction?

[druid91]

I love how people who have not read the series has opinions on modernizing it or not. They assume it is either benign or it is horrid, but how would they know?

They are literally being prejudicial with prejudging a work they do not know.

—————

Sidenote who is going to make the thread on what should be modernized or keep the series perfectly intact for the Dune series?

I honestly don't know, nor care what the work is like. I just think 'modernizing' it is silly.

[Ramza00]

That is true (I hope), but doesn't answer the question of: do you want media beloved to you replaced with bad, policitically charged fan-fiction?

What is bad? What is good?
What is impure? What is pure and therefore good?
What is evil? What is the good?

I answered that with referencing the golden mean. Some things you can not define by themselves without context or relations to other things.

—————

I do not grant some things are self evidently bad prior to experiencing them. But yes I have endured bad adaptation, and great adaptations. Enduring one allows the other to also occur.

I also do not believe being as literal to the adaptation is a good thing, some things are meant to change, and that is okay.

My views are summed up well with Philosophy Tube’s Artists & Fandoms https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IG0Y63LkDM

And KyleKallgrenBHH’s Westworld - Travels in Hyperreality https://youtu.be/hHpadBLs3xg

When someone tries to control new things, to try to control derivatives and fan fictions instead of recognizing A is separate from A’ or A’’ then I think they have gotten lost in a simulation of Jean Baudrillard / Umberto Eco. They can no longer tell if a representation is its own thing, separate from the inspiring event that preceded it. They are living in a fantasy called hyperreality, and do not recognize they are in hyperreality.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperreality

Getting angry that someone created something different than you is getting lost in the matrix, lost in a simulation.

It is getting mad the Starship Trooper film of Paul Verhoeven and Edward Neumeier Satires the original novel by Robert A. Heinlein.

It is getting mad that people thought Plutarch said this

And when Alexander saw the breadth of his domain, he wept. For there were no more worlds to conquer. [(to Takagi) The benefits of a classical education.]

When in reality that Die Hard quote is wrong and is an in joke that Hans is a poser for Plutarch said the opposite.

Alexander wept when he heard Anaxarchus discourse about an infinite number of worlds, and when his friends inquired what ailed him, "Is it not worthy of tears," he said, "that, when the number of worlds is infinite, we have not yet become lords of a single one?

Note this corruption did not originate with Die Hard. It is at least 300 years old with William Congreve’s play Way of the World (1700), but other things beside Die Hard have similar variants such as The Twilight Zone, and the famous book writer James Baldwin of the 1800s who wrote penny books / readers which made famous stories and characters popular.

Corruptions happen and that is the nature of reality. That is what humans do with stories. We tell them and then we retell them changing them in the process. If we did not retell stories then everything becomes fixed and static. Whether the retelling is good or bad, superior or inferior is in the subjective eye of the beholder, it is contextual and is the way of opinion not facts.

Likewise I have no problems with politics for I see politics as the act of telling stories and is inherent with both crafts.

—————

I do not see stories as temples that must be preserved, separated, and can never be defiled. I see stories as living things.

That is true (I hope), but doesn't answer the question of: do you want media beloved to you replaced with bad, policitically charged fan-fiction?

Are you satisfied with my Answer? “King of Heroes” (This is a reference to a really bad anime and visual novel, so utterly bad and cringe, yet it is fun.)

Do you have any regrets asking me Dancrilis that question?

[Themrys]

I honestly don't know, nor care what the work is like. I just think 'modernizing' it is silly.

I am inclined to agree. Once you reach a point where you have to change the work in ways that the author most certainly would not have agreed with in order to be able to enjoy it, perhaps that work is just not for you.

Every adaptation changes stuff, and to me, it is all okay as long as I can assume that the author might just possibly have decided to write it that way if someone had suggested it to them.


Adding Tauriel would not have been a problem in The Hobbit, Tolkien himself seems to not have been quite decided on whether he wanted elves to even have gender stereotypes, so a female guard background character would have been absolutely zero problem and they should in fact have added more.

Same with female dwarves - Tolkien made it quite clear that none of the dwarves in The Hobbit were actually female, if I remember correctly, but the theoretical existence of crossdressing female dwarves traveling Middle Earth is implied in some of his writings.

I have to admit that probably even the romantic subplot, which I hated, might pass the test since "woman falls in love with man at first sight, then runs away from her people to try and save his life" is a plot Tolkien himself wrote, only with different characters.


Or look at Harry Potter - Rowling clearly had no problem with Hermione being played by a black actor in the Play That Shall Not Be Named and even pointed out that she had never specified that Hermione was white. It is a change that passes the "might the author have written it that way" test.



Since I haven't read Wheel of Time, I can't be completely certain, but I rather think that changing the way magic works to be independent from sex when the author not only implied but explicitly stated it was strongly tied to sex ... probably does not pass the test.

[Rynjin]

What is bad? What is good?
What is impure? What is pure and therefore good?
What is evil? What is the good?

I answered that with referencing the golden mean. Some things you can not define by themselves without context or relations to other things.

In the abstract, this is a hard question to answer. In the specific, it's not as much.

What is good? To fans of the series, the series is good. An existing audience for the adaptation is, naturally, the fans.

Therefore, a good adaptation will keep as much of the series that the fans like as possible. Because the given material is "good" in this context, and anything that reduces that "good" is therefore "bad".

Some amount of "bad" is inevitable in any adaptation, and some "good" can be added, but that part's a bit more subjective.

However, in this case the subjective "good" being added requires the addition of an enormous amount of objective (in this context) "bad".

[Ramza00]

Since I haven't read Wheel of Time, I can't be completely certain, but I rather think that changing the way magic works to be independent from sex when the author not only implied but explicitly stated it was strongly tied to sex ... probably does not pass the test.

It very much in line with the themes of the text, but is not in line with the themes as presented in book 1, but that is the nature of the stories where the hegemonic themes of the society as it was constructed was wrong, artificial, stifling, and that change is good. Change drives the wheel forward and humans are creatures of change and choice not creatures unique to the creator or the dark one.

Hell this is the opening passage of the The Wheel of Time.

The Wheel of Time turns, and ages come and pass, leaving memories that become legend. Legends fade to myth, and even myth is long forgotten when the Age that gave it birth comes again. [In one Age, called the third age by some, an Age yet to come, an age long pass, a wind rose in the Mountains of Mist. The wind was not the beginning. There are neither beginnings or endings to the turning of the Wheel of Time. But it was a beginning.]

I put this in brackets for the author Robert Jordan loves this quote but he sometimes omits the bracket part which is part of the start of the story. Jordan himself sees things as hegemonic time some of the time, and then times of transition, put another way times of change as in liminal time where the rules of everything gets rewritten. It is arguably the most important theme in the Wheel of Time work, one that is beaten into the readers head again and again.

But the series is 4 million words so people can disagree with this.

In the abstract, this is a hard question to answer. In the specific, it's not as much.

What is good? To fans of the series, the series is good. An existing audience for the adaptation is, naturally, the fans.

I am a fan of the series. I love the series simultaneously while thinking it is not good in parts.

Yet other fans will have different opinions of mine. We live in a world of interpretative communities, aka factions that share a common way of viewing things and why we like some things but hate others.

But interpretative communities mean some people are vehemently disagree with one another. You think Star War Fans are bad with arguing about The Last Jedi, wait till you meet the pro Egwene vs the anti Egwene factions of The Wheel of Time. (Fans who read the series will get this comment, and no it is not a joke, yet I am using it as a joke here.)

[dancrilis]

Do you have any regrets asking me Dancrilis that question?

I generally don't have any regrets asking anyone questions but you still haven't answered it clearly, I will try to make it more explicit:
Do you Ramza00 want media beloved by you replaced with media that you consider to be bad, policitically charged fan-fiction?

... explicitly stated it was strongly tied to sex ...

Not merely strongly tied it is effectively absolute (within the storyline of the series, possibly baring the very end books completed after the author died which I have not read).

[Rynjin]

Something to be mentioned, that I had forgotten about for a bit too...the ending of the series already implies a change in the nature of the One Power. Namely that it seems as though people can now have access to the True Power instead, which IS gender neutral.

So changing the nature of Saidar/Saidin to be gender neutral also has another wrinkle there.

But interpretative communities mean some people are vehemently disagree with one another. You think Star War Fans are bad with arguing about The Last Jedi, wait till you meet the pro Egwene vs the anti Egwene factions of The Wheel of Time. (Fans who read the series will get this comment, and no it is not a joke, yet I am using it as a joke here.)

Maybe, but I'd wager that if the proposed change was "remove Egwene from the story" you'd get pushback even from a large contingent of the anti-Egwene faction.

[Ramza00]

I generally don't have any regrets asking anyone questions but you still haven't answered it clearly, I will try to make it more explicit:
Do you Ramza00 want media beloved by you replaced with media that you consider to be bad, policitically charged fan-fiction?

Let me try again, for I think metaphor is what answers your question.

"You mock my pain!"
"Life is pain, Highness. Anyone who says differently is trying to sell you a monthly streaming service." (masked man)

—————

Or if this is no clear to you. Let me say that I am a romantic, I love chapter 117 of The Count of Monte Cristo (The letter and the books ends with “Wait and Hope.”)

I am agnostic but I am moved by the concept called “Felix culpa“ (Fortunate Fall / Happy Fault)

Better to be alive and cognizant of reality than a fleshy machine, even if that fleshy machine is a golden retriever analog. Of course being a romantic means I took suffer from depression, despair, and grief.

I want this world to turn, to improve of our own volition. Anything else would be tyrannical and be antithetical to the romantics.