I seriously don't know why you're still reading these books. Really, I'm not saying that to be funny but it seems with each new blog post that there's more and more you dislike. But anyway, the thing about Rand and Mat not being proper heroes, (and not helping a woman in trouble, but isn't that sexist?) is because they are, really, just a couple of kids who have never left their village before, probably never seen violence before and certainly never monsters and the like. They're not instant heroes, they may or may not become heroes later, but they're not there yet. And as for Rand not selling his sword, it's not rational I know, but from his point of view it's a last reminder of his Dad who may not be his Dad and who he may not see again. And again, he's just a kid, I guess I can understand the sentiment there.

I seriously don't know why you're still reading these books. Really, I'm not saying that to be funny but it seems with each new blog post that there's more and more you dislike. But anyway, the thing about Rand and Mat not being proper heroes, (and not helping a woman in trouble, but isn't that sexist?) is because they are, really, just a couple of kids who have never left their village before, probably never seen violence before and certainly never monsters and the like. They're not instant heroes, they may or may not become heroes later, but they're not there yet. And as for Rand not selling his sword, it's not rational I know, but from his point of view it's a last reminder of his Dad who may not be his Dad and who he may not see again. And again, he's just a kid, I guess I can understand the sentiment there.

Well, I'm enjoying the story. That's why I'm reading the books. I want to get to the parts everyone says are really good and to get there I've got to read through this.

No, not helping the woman isn't sexist. It's just dickish. I can't think of a single hero that would just stand there and watch it. Superman, Batman, Luke Skywalker, anyone. Yes, he's just a kid. But I would respect him so much more if he would have spoken up, got his ass kicked by the bouncer, and tossed outside in the rain, his flute snapped in half. Instead of standing up for what was right (and getting a dose of reality tossed at him) he just went along with what was wrong because he served his purpose.

I want to get to the parts everyone says are really good and to get there I've got to read through this.No, not helping the woman isn't sexist. It's just dickish. I can't think of a single hero that would just stand there and watch it. Superman, Batman, Luke Skywalker, anyone. Yes, he's just a kid. But I would respect him so much more if he would have spoken up, got his ass kicked by the bouncer, and tossed outside in the rain, his flute snapped in half. Instead of standing up for what was right (and getting a dose of reality tossed at him) he just went along with what was wrong because he served his purpose.

Rand is Peter Parker 5 minutes post spider bite here. He has extraordinary powers but doesn't know they really exist of that he can use it. That being said, the Shadar Logoth to Caemlyn chapters are rough to get through.

These kids aren't heroes, at least not at this point.

And, as you've already finished the book, you've caught onto unusual things that were lucky for Rand. Bela keeping up with the other horses? The boom? The lightning? All Rand channeling, and the lightheadedness and giddiness that followed in Baerlon, on the Spray, and the sickness Rand's about to get where all forms of channeling sickness.

Moiraine explains the process to Nynaeve. I think you've already read it.

Ah well, I'm sure you put it all together when you finished this book, so I don't know why I'm writing.

Yep.

Uh...

I could've sworn there was at least one woman innkeeper in this novel, but I guess not. You're off to Caemlyn next with a sick Rand, right?

Aside from all this feminist rant (yes, it's a rant, even if it's justified by the text for a large part), you might know by now that there are more and more women's point of views in the next books. Did that lessen or at least change your opinion on the sexism in these books ?

No, not helping the woman isn't sexist. It's just dickish. I can't think of a single hero that would just stand there and watch it. Superman, Batman, Luke Skywalker, anyone. Yes, he's just a kid. But I would respect him so much more if he would have spoken up, got his ass kicked by the bouncer, and tossed outside in the rain, his flute snapped in half. Instead of standing up for what was right (and getting a dose of reality tossed at him) he just went along with what was wrong because he served his purpose.

I was being a little sarcastic to tell you truth, but I actually meant is it not sexist to help a woman in trouble, rather than not help? I asked because in previous blogs you had been upset when Perrin was protective over Egwene with Aram, and Rand when he was looking out for Egwene early on when they left the Two Rivers. Now I know Aram was harmless, he only wanted to dance and we know there was nothing sinister about him, but for all Perrin knew Aram could have been a Darkfriend rapist. And there was certainly danger for Egwene when they were fleeing home.

I guess what I'm trying to say is I don't understand why it's OK if Rand had stood up for the barmaid but it's not OK when he's protective over Egwene when the Trollocs are on their tail.

I guess what I'm trying to say is I don't understand why it's OK if Rand had stood up for the barmaid but it's not OK when he's protective over Egwene when the Trollocs are on their tail.

Take Perrin, Aram, and Egwene. Perrin is sitting by the fire, talking about the Way of the Leaf, when Aram comes over and asks Egwene out. This makes Perrin get defensive, to protect his friend. Imagine if Aram walked up to Egwene and slapped her to the ground instead of hitting on her. Then, yes, get up Perrin. Act protective of Egwene. Two Rivers folk have to stick together.

Take Rand, Bartender, and Waitress. Rand is sitting there, trying to get a job, when Bartender comes over and slaps the Waitress down. This does not make Rand get defensive, willing to protect the innocent. Imagine if the Bartender walked up to the Waitress and asked her out instead of slapping her. Then, according to book's logic, Rand gets defensive. Men do not ask out women (without permission or whatever).

Aram, the pacifist Roma could have been a Darkfriend rapist. But so could Master Hake, the innkeeper. Given the way bad guys are obviously bad it makes more sense, given the metaphysics, for Hake to be a Darkfriend rapist.

Aside from all this feminist rant (yes, it's a rant, even if it's justified by the text for a large part), you might know by now that there are more and more women's point of views in the next books. Did that lessen or at least change your opinion on the sexism in these books ?

A rant? Yes, maybe. I'd like to use the fancy word "polemic." I think I've ended up writing a polemic against the book (not what I started off wanting to do, mind you!).

Do the female POVs change my opinion of sexism in the books? Hmm, that's a toughie. I mean, so far no one has said anything to refute what has gone on in Book One. I still see Two Rivers as a misogynist backwater. But the rest of the world? Not the same as Two Rivers.

I'll get into it later, when I get to posting about those parts. But generally speaking, so far I see a rift in the Aes Sedai between those misandrists Reds who are willing to commit gender genocide to prevent another Breaking and the Moiraine-Siuan Conspiracy who actually want to bring about the End of the World because they don't think it will be the end. And in Fal Dara I see women undoubtedly in absolute control of the Women's Apartments in the keep (The thing is, I don't write much about the sexism at that point because it's just turning people off. Instead, I write about classism, mostly.). But that's all in Book Two so I really don't want to get into it until then.

@Agitel: The first and only female innkeeper I've come across was in Illian early in The Great Hunt. She owned, I kid you not, an inn called Easing the Beaver. She got three lines of dialogue, I think, when Bayle Domon stopped in to see some men there. But I was happy to see it, nonetheless.

Random point. You've mentioned in several blogs the apparent impotence of Trollocs since water stops them. I just wanted to point out that sinking the the ferry didn't stop the Trollocs because they were afraid of water. It stopped them because we're talking about a full size fast moving river which, with the ferry destroyed, they had no way to cross without detouring well out of their way to the south. They mention early in the book that the Taren is a very fast moving river. Imagine chasing someone across the Missouri or Mississippi rivers with no way to cross and while wearing armor. Probably not the best idea.

@Agitel: The first and only female innkeeper I've come across was in Illian early in The Great Hunt. She owned, I kid you not, an inn called Easing the Beaver. She got three lines of dialogue, I think, when Bayle Domon stopped in to see some men there. But I was happy to see it, nonetheless.

I thought it was Easing the Badger.... whatever, it's been a while since I read TGH.

I still see Two Rivers as a misogynist backwater.

Was wondering if you had seen these quotes from EotW glossary provided in the main thread and if it changes your mind on some issues?

Women’s Circle: A group of women elected by the women of a village, responsible for deciding such matters as are considered solely women’s responsibility (for example, when to plant the crops and when to harvest). Equal in authority to the Village Council, with clearly-delineated lines and areas of responsibility. Often at odds with the Village Council.

Wisdom: In villages, a woman chosen by the Women’s Circle to sit in the Circle for her knowledge of such things as healing and foretelling the weather, as well as for common good sense. A position of great responsibility and authority, both actual and implied. She is generally considered the equal of the Mayor, and in some villages his superior. Unlike the Mayor, she is chosen for life, and it is very rare for a Wisdom to be removed from office before her death. Almost traditionally in conflict with the Mayor.

Why would they look in the glossary? Any additional information might dissolve their preconceived notions about rampant sexism in this series.

Take Perrin, Aram, and Egwene. Perrin is sitting by the fire, talking about the Way of the Leaf, when Aram comes over and asks Egwene out. This makes Perrin get defensive, to protect his friend. Imagine if Aram walked up to Egwene and slapped her to the ground instead of hitting on her. Then, yes, get up Perrin. Act protective of Egwene. Two Rivers folk have to stick together.Take Rand, Bartender, and Waitress. Rand is sitting there, trying to get a job, when Bartender comes over and slaps the Waitress down. This does not make Rand get defensive, willing to protect the innocent. Imagine if the Bartender walked up to the Waitress and asked her out instead of slapping her. Then, according to book's logic, Rand gets defensive. Men do not ask out women (without permission or whatever).Aram, the pacifist Roma could have been a Darkfriend rapist. But so could Master Hake, the innkeeper. Given the way bad guys are obviously bad it makes more sense, given the metaphysics, for Hake to be a Darkfriend rapist

<br><br>I still put Rand's reaction, or lack of it, down to his youth and his farmboy upbringing. He's probably never seen a man hit a woman before. Yes, it would have been heroic if he had done something, but out of character and not unreasonable to think he was simply too scared. It's easy to think you can protect your friends (or the innocent) but a different thing when, to put it crudely, the s**t hits the fan. I know, I've been there. But it still doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the innate desire to look out for people you care about.<br><br>I don't see the correlation you make in your scenario between Egwene/Perrin and Rand/barmaid because Egwene is Perrin's freind, the barmaind is not Rand's. Perrin was being protective over his 16 year old friend who was being wooed by a stranger (who was also trying to wind Perrin up; read the "he flashed Perrin a triumphant grin" passage again.) Rand knows nothing of the barmaid so I see no reason to think he would get defensive over the barmaid if Hake had simply asked her out. I honestly don't think that's the logic Robert Jordan was using. Maybe you were being sarcastic, which is cool as I love sarcasm. (I wasn't being sarcastic there!).<br><br>Here's a thought, what if Rand and Mat had walked into that bar, took one look at Hake and thought he looked a nasty piece of work, then took the barmaid into the corner and said something along the lines of 'I don't think you should be working for that low-life'. Would that not have been OK? Or does it basically boil down to mean there has to be action before

Rand or Perrin or whoever can act? It's OK for Perrin to protect Egwene if Aram hit

her, but until that happens he shouldn't do a thing, shouldn't be

suspicious of strangers?

Pah, not sure why that's come out all wonky.<br>

I still see Two Rivers as a misogynist backwater.

Was wondering if you had seen these quotes from EotW glossary provided in the main thread and if it changes your mind on some issues?

I didn't know there was a glossary in the book until I finished it. And I know there are people out here on this forum who will point their fingers at me and yell that I'm willfully being obtuse and ignoring evidence because it furthers my "agenda." But I don't care (and am confused since I don't have an agenda; unless you call "being happy" an agenda!).

You see, I don't think the glossary should count. It's part of the para-text. It's like the table of contents, the cover art, the About the Author section on the back flap, the chapter titles and icons, the Praise For This Book part at the beginning, and all the other parts of the book that aren't actually the text. It's on the same level as a (sold-separately) Wheel of Time Encyclopaedia, Art Book of the Wheel of Time, author interviews (and blogs and tweets and such), online FAQs and Wikias (that I've done a good job of avoiding, thank you), and publicity posters. It isn't a part of the story but a part of the apparatus of the story-telling process.

So, sure, the glossary says what it says about Wisdoms. Fine. Show that in the book. Show that when the Wisdom does her thing. Show that when the Women's Circle acts. It just doesn't happen, though, not like the glossary says.

I've been told to ignore the picture on the cover of the book because it doesn't reflect what is on the pages. It's inaccurate and could be done better. Well, fine. But I'm also ignoring the glossary because I don't feel it reflects what is on the pages. It's inaccurate and could be done better.

Why would they look in the glossary? Any additional information might dissolve their preconceived notions about rampant sexism in this series.

Now that's just mean. We can do better than that, can't we?

First, I've never read the series before. How can I have preconceived notions about it? If anything, I was under the impression of an equal society with female wizards fighting a big bad Satan analogue. I was told the book would be exactly as most of the forum says it is. But that isn't what I'm reading. Additional information (as in what I've read so far) is dissolving my preconceived notion that this book had any sort of gender equality.

Second, additional knowledge might dissolve my notions about rampant sexism. I admit to that. But a glossary? Really? This isn't a scholarly work that requires meticulously detailed bibliography pages. It's an overly long fantasy book. Why would it need its own glossary? Could it be because the writing is so poor that one needs to be flat out told, in list form, the characteristics of what's in the book because the writer did a poor job of conveying it in the text itself? "Now I want to Wisdom to be a powerful force in local politics but I've written her as an ineffective healer-person that no one respects. I could go back and rewrite her parts to make her a stronger character or I could just write a glossary entry. That'll fix everything."

I still put Rand's reaction, or lack of it, down to his youth and his farmboy upbringing. He's probably never seen a man hit a woman before.

All violence is unheard of in Emond's Field, from what I remember (even domestic violence, in a world where I'm told women hit their wool-headed men right across the noggin all the time). He's probably never seen a man hit a man before, not like that, not beaten to the ground. In spite of that, the Boys are never that protective of other boys, friend or no friend. For whatever reason, whatever excuse his culture has for this behavior, however justified it may seem to everyone involved, it is still sexist (there, I used that word again). I can't get behind that.

Yes, it would have been heroic if he had done something, but out of character and not unreasonable to think he was simply too scared.

Yes. It wouldn't be out of character for them. I admit as much. The thing is: that's a problem. I don't like that "doing nothing when a man slaps a woman I don't know off her feet" is perfectly in keeping with the main character's personality. In a normal book, four hundred pages would be about when the climax happens. But here, the series prologue isn't even over. In the space of a normal story (or one I'm used to reading, at least), of a normal character arc with a beginning and middle and end, Rand hasn't done anything. No growth. He's still a selfish, cowardly nobody (who is overly protective of Egwene and only Egwene). And he will continue to be at least until half-way through The Great Hunt. His "if it doesn't hurt me or Egwene then it doesn't really matter" attitude just bothers me, you know? I want the main character to be a hero, not Rand.

Does that make sense? I can try to elaborate but I'm afraid I'd just end up confusing myself!

Perrin was being protective over his 16 year old friend who was being wooed by a stranger (who was also trying to wind Perrin up; read the "he flashed Perrin a triumphant grin" passage again.)

Not to sound childish, but who started it? Aram came over to hit on Egwene, not to wind Perrin up. It was only after Perrin started getting passive aggressive did Aram start acting cocky.

Here's a thought, what if Rand and Mat had walked into that bar, took one look at Hake and thought he looked a nasty piece of work, then took the barmaid into the corner and said something along the lines of 'I don't think you should be working for that low-life'. Would that not have been OK?

Yes, that would have been fine. There would have been no slapping and no need to worry about Rand not being a hero. It would have even made the Boys seem savvy, too, instead of blindingly walking into such a wretched place.

My point was that Rand doesn't stand up for Goodness. You know? He saved Tam and that was a good thing. I cheered him on as he did it. But he has run away from danger ever since. He didn't stop (or even try to stop; or even question) Moiraine when she sank the ferry. He didn't stop Mat when he pissed off the Whitecloaks (or, since he didn't know what was going on until too late, he didn't say "not cool" after it was all over). He didn't disembark from the Spray to go looking for his friends right after Shadar Logoth, just trusting that they would either get to Caemlyn or die alone in the woods. He didn't help this barmaid, either. He is unlike any protagonist in any novel I've ever read. He goes with the flow, letting bad things happen, and just lets the plot take him where it will. He isn't doing anything, not actively, not since saving Tam (and he won't until the very end of the climax).

This is in character for him, sure. I can totally believe he does what he does. I just don't like it. Give me Egwene or Nynaeve or even Moiraine.

It's OK for Perrin to protect Egwene if Aram hit her, but until that happens he shouldn't do a thing, shouldn't be suspicious of strangers?

More or less. If Perrin were suspicious of all strangers then I could believe that he'd be suspicious of Aram. But he instantly fell in love with Elyas. He didn't say anything when Lan or Thom or Moiraine came to Emond's Field. He wasn't suspicious of Mahdi Raen or his wife (in fact, he said that he had always wanted to meet a Tinker; he was so not suspicious) or Master Fitch or Ara the spa therapist or even Min. He didn't give the stink eye to anyone in the Stag and Lion during the square dance nor to the gate guards in Baerlon. It was only Aram. What was it that Aram did that not one of the other strangers did? Aram showed interest in Egwene. Thom, to be fair, did ask Egwene to be his gleeman's assistant but that didn't seem fishy. So all that was enough for me to say it wasn't okay for Perrin to be protective of Egwene here, at this moment, in this situation. Either be suspicious of everyone or have a reason beyond "I don't want this guy talking to Egwene" to be suspicious of Aram.

Yes. It wouldn't be out of character for them. I admit as much. The thing is: that's a problem. I don't like that "doing nothing when a man slaps a woman I don't know off her feet" is perfectly in keeping with the main character's personality. In a normal book, four hundred pages would be about when the climax happens. But here, the series prologue isn't even over. In the space of a normal story (or one I'm used to reading, at least), of a normal character arc with a beginning and middle and end, Rand hasn't done anything. No growth. He's still a selfish, cowardly nobody (who is overly protective of Egwene and only Egwene). And he will continue to be at least until half-way through The Great Hunt. His "if it doesn't hurt me or Egwene then it doesn't really matter" attitude just bothers me, you know? I want the main character to be a hero, not Rand.<br>

<br>

Does that make sense? I can try to elaborate but I'm afraid I'd just end up confusing myself!

<br><br>Yes, it makes sense but I think you're maybe expecting things to move too quickly. I know you've never read epic fantasy before but in a 14 books series character development will be slow. But he did some cool stuff at this end of this book, didn't he? I thought he did. But no, he's not perfect, he has many  flaws. Would you have preferred a perfect hero from the beginning though? Would that not have been too Hollywood cheesy? That he has flaws are part of what makes him real, make him human to me. I obviously don't want to spoil later books but I will say, as others have, that his character growth is one of the best in the books, in my opinion at least, so I encourage you to read on and see if you change your view on him or not.<br><br>I still disagree to a point with the other over-protectiveness stuff but I fear I may bore you and myself to death!<br>

<br>

<br>

<br><br>

<br>

What the hecks going on with this layout?<br>

- think most people would just disagree with how you see the women portrayed in the text. We didn't finish it thinking one thing and then change our minds after the glossary and author interviews.

Ah well, I'm not arguing, I just want to make clear we didn't rely on outside text for our opinions. Keep it up!

I've been told to ignore the picture on the cover of the book because it doesn't reflect what is on the pages. It's inaccurate and could be done better. Well, fine. But I'm also ignoring the glossary because I don't feel it reflects what is on the pages. It's inaccurate and could be done better.

Have to disagree here, they are two VERY different things. Authors have little influence over cover art for their books. That is mostly handled on the publishing side of things.

The glossary on the other hand is well thought out and comes directly from RJ. I have never found it to be inaccurate or unsupported by the storyline. Having said that I do enjoy the blog and hope you keep sticking to your guns. Puts a huge smile on my face every time I read a sentence that I know is going to send a certain segments of the fandom into apoplexy. Cheers.

It will be funny whe she meets the ******* soldiers in book 5 or 6. That's when we read 20 pages about a high rank officer or ship captain without knowing if it's a man or woman.

Aram is a sleaze-ball. Elyas is rough at the edges, and Perrin was guarded of him at first, but he never tried anything. Perrin has seen Aram's sort before, however -- he mentions Wil al'Seen, for example. He also believes that Egwene is Rand's girlfriend, and watching your best friend's girlfriend run off with someone else...

Also, Elyas is not saying that Perrin is going to be more skilled because he does not want to use the axe. He says that he should go on using it, because the fact that he does not like using it will make him a better person than someone who would. It has nothing to do with being "cool."

The Children might very well have been within their charter as a paramilitary police force trying to stop them.

Just an aside' date=' the Children of the Light have no legal standing in Andor. They have complete sway over Amadacia, and some little influence (official or not) in other lands. Their "authority" over people comes from the fact that they follow the bigger stick approach. If you don't do what they tell you then you're a darkfriend and they seize you, torture you (possibly) and kill you (again possibly). They back this up with basically a bully type mentality.... respect through fear. Take the scene in Baerlon for instance. They walk through an open space in the middle of a crowd. Sure some people smile and actually respect them, but most are shying away to avoid calling the attention of the bullies down on themselves. As to Mat no I don't agree with cutting loose a bunch of barrels to knock some stuck up people down a few pegs (not that it doesn't occasionally need to be done ;)), but their response was not to just be pissed off, which is of course quite reasonable, but to try and arrest Rand because since he found it funny he must obviously be evil. The only thing that stopped them were the heron markings on Rand's sword, and his apparent willingness to bare steel, since they thought he was a blade master and would kick all their asses.

Then there is this moment in the stedding.

 

I have no idea why they were there except to get water. But they ended up killing some wolves around the watering hole. How is that a crime in any kingdom on the Wheel of Time world? They do that in the Two Rivers! In the very first chapter of this book Rand was holding a bow ready just in case he had to kill a wolf! Anyway, they find two kids in the woods only to have one of them leap out and murder two of their riders. The Whitecloaks have done nothing in this entire book except defend themselves and uphold the law. The "heroes" are bribing officials and murdering police officers. What is the world coming to?

While yes you make a good point in the difference between the Children "upholding the law" vs. the the "heroes" have done as far as bribing people, etc. you're glossing over something. Like I noted above the Children have no legal authority in Andor. So even though they see something illegal happening that doesn't give them the right or authority to enforce any laws. And they're certainly not police officers. Just like you said they're a semi-religious (as far as there is religion in this world) paramilitary group answerable only to themselves and who have a very narrow view of right/wrong.... basically if you agree with them you're right, if you don't you're wrong and probably a darkfriend.

Part of the ..... I don't want to say logic...... impetus? of Perrin attacking the Children after they killed Hopper was that the wolf side of Perrin sort of took over. The part of his brain that talks to wolves see wolves as basically other people, people who don't deserve to be summarily killed just because the Children don't like them. Anyway that part of Perrin (a part which is recently new, which he cannot control and which scares him to death) saw a friend being killed and ran to it's defense, or in this case to exact revenge as Hopper had already been killed. Perrin fighting the part of him that is connected to the wolves is prevalent over the next several books. It's certainly not just him being a blood thirsty neaderthol.

"I know you don't want to' date=' I know it kills a little bit of your soul every time you use it. But are you trying to be a effin' pussy? Cowboy up, keep your axe, and go kill things with it. That's how you know you're a man, son." Thus Perrin, so close to making a breakthrough, is pulled back into the violent cycle of killing to be cool. Elyas tosses some philosophy at Perrin about how, since he doesn't want to use it then he'll somehow be better at using it. Yeah, the same way a kid who doesn't want to play baseball is going to be better than the kid who wants to play and practices every single day.

 

........

 

It is as if the people who don't want something are inherently better at it than someone who wants it. Ambition is evil, you know? A person who tries to become king is always a bad king. But the farmboy who has never studied politics, has never seen a foreigner in the flesh, has never dreamed of doing anything but farming? Well, he'll be the best king ever.[/quote']

 

Like dholm said Elyas' statement about keeping the axe until he no longer hates using it isn't a statement of "go have fun, kill people and bathe in their blood, then you're a man!". It also didn't say that using the axe would make him a better person than he would be if he didn't use the axe. He's saying that as Perrin hated the axe and doesn't want to use it that he would use it more responsibly, less capriciously, than would a person who enjoyed cutting people open with a sharp implement. It would be like giving a flamethrower to a person and sending them out into a crowd of children. Do you give it to the person who hates what the flamethrower is, what it stands for, or to the person who jumps in glee and claps his hands and tells you he can't wait to light someone up?

 

On to Kings, while I appreciate your point about a person who's trained for something probably doing a better job than a novice who's never heard about it that isn't quite the point in this case. The whole point of that kind of comment.... "He doesn't want it so he'll do a better job".... is that the person who doesn't want the job is theoretically less likely to abuse what power he's given. Exact same thing with the axe.

 

Rand doesn't care because he just leaves any inn with a musician already in there. He isn't in the least bit concerned with perfecting his craft' date=' no. He just wants paid.[/quote']

 

Of course he just wants to be paid. He's a kid out of his element, he's hungry, he's tired, he's scared, he's being hunted by evil things he used to think were fairy tales and he doesn't know if some of his closest friends are alive. He just wants some money so he can eat and to potentially get him to Caemlyn a little faster.

 

Anyway' date=' this guy is the worst spy in the world. He dresses differently than everyone, sits apart from everyone, orders wine but doesn't drink it. Seriously, its as if he is trying to be noticed. A true spy would be one of those burly men in the crowd screaming for Rand to play, "Freebird!"[/quote']

 

Ah, but who said he was a spy? As you've learned by now he's an upper level Darkfriend (well lower-middle management anyway), a merchant of some means. He's not trying to spy on Rand and sell off information to someone. He's there as the ringleader of this group of DF's. His sitting obviously and smiling at Rand is more of a "you're trapped and there's nothing you can do about it" kind of goad.

 

Anyway' date=' Rand and Mat get up on stage and start their routine. Rand tries to hide his bird-marked sword because it attracts unwanted attention. These people don't believe in Trollocs but they believe that anybody with a bird sword is dangerous. This is a world without counterfeiters. Seriously, I wouldn't be able to tell an aluminum toy sword from a centuries-old masterwork katana from across a smoke-filled bar so I wouldn't assume the majority of half-drunk roughnecks in that room could, either. But Rand is still worried. So there you go.[/quote']

 

I wouldn't say it's a world without counterfeiters, however in this world a sword isn't quite the same thing as it would be now. In our world a person might have a display sword, or they're a collector. Depending on how much they want to spend and if they want actual weapons or just something pretty you might have a complete POS, or a implement of death. In the WoT world a sword is a sword, just that. It's a weapon. Sure some might be of much better quality than others (and since you're well in TGH you know Rand's is an uber-special one), but all of them are going to be actual weapons.

 

As to the herons attracting attention in this setting they would. The heron in the WoT is the mark of a blademaster, an expert swordsman. It's not much of a spoiler, but the only way to become a blademaster and earn the heron is to defeat a blademaster in combat, or to be judged worthy by I think five other blademasters. It's kind of like a black belt in a martial art except imagine that instead of (for instance) 10 belts from novice to expert there's only a black belt. A person you encounter with a sword might have just picked it up, or they could be reasonably good. A person with the Heron-mark sword on the other hand you automatically assume can and will kick your ass if you give them reason to.

 

Aside from the herons just being there they attract attention specifically because he is so young. Attaining blademaster rank generally takes people a good long time to do, so one would expect them to be a little older. So either he's young and a great swordsman or he has a fancy sword and isn't sure which end goes in the bad guy. From the perspective of someone facing him they may convince themselves that it's the later (which indeed at this point is the case... mostly), but they still won't be able to get rid of that lingering doubt that perhaps the person they just convinced themselves is an idiot will actually kill them with ease. This is exactly what goes on with Bornhald (see easier than Lord Captain) and the other Children in Baerlon. His man points out the heron mark, and Bornhald immediately says "He's too young" but he's immediately wary just the same.

 

Sorry for the novella response. :)

Just wanted to point out that the boys started practicing under Thom back when they were travel ling to Baerlon from Taren Ferry, so it isn't unreasonable to believe that Mat can juggle.

Just an aside, the Children of the Light have no legal standing in Andor. They have complete sway over Amadacia, and some little influence (official or not) in other lands.

In the modern world I can see this being a good excuse. The FBI doesn't have authority in Moscow, for example. But this isn't the modern world. The Aes Sedai, for example, only have official control of Tar Valon but they "command" in a lot of places along the Borderlands. The Children of the Light seem to be the same. While they only hold sway in Amadacia (though I didn't know that; must be from further along in the reading) they still push their influence to other places.

Besides, Queen Morgase doesn't seem to have a strong hold on her kingdom. Two Rivers never heard of her, after all, and even Caemlyn is overrun with anti-Queen factions. Baerlon, too, seems to be it's own place that seems to only pay taxes and lip service to the throne. After all, Baerlon is defended by the Town Watch and not the Queen's Men. It would make sense for the local Governor to make a deal with the Whitecloaks (especially if the Governor is anti-queen, too) to let them into the city.

Even if that weren't true. Let's say I'm wrong about all that. This isn't exactly an Enlightened society. This is a kingdom with unelected rulers-for-life, not a democracy. Those in charge do what they want. Those with swords have even more authority. Unless there is some sort of constitution or the like, the Whitecloaks' swords give them the right to stop bad guys. Call then bounty hunters, if you must.

But that's just my opinion and I could be wrong about the politics of legitimate authority in this setting.

While yes you make a good point in the difference between the Children "upholding the law" vs. the the "heroes" have done as far as bribing people, etc. you're glossing over something. Like I noted above the Children have no legal authority in Andor. So even though they see something illegal happening that doesn't give them the right or authority to enforce any laws.

I have to disagree, here. Again, I could be wrong, but to say that the Whitecloaks have no right to enforce the law? That's like saying Rand did a good thing in letting Hake slap his barmaid because it isn't Rand's job to enforce the law. Even in the lawless Wild West it was expected for decent folks to fight against the lawlessness of the land. You see a foreigner bribing the city gate guards and harboring a kid who plastered citizens in the streets? Detain them! What were the Children supposed to do? Shoo them on their way because they don't have the authority for a citizen's arrest?

Part of the ..... I don't want to say logic...... impetus? of Perrin attacking the Children after they killed Hopper was that the wolf side of Perrin sort of took over. The part of his brain that talks to wolves see wolves as basically other people, people who don't deserve to be summarily killed just because the Children don't like them.

In the modern world I can see this being a defense. In court, Perrin would get a good lawyer and a state-licensed wizard to get the jury to find him not guilty by reason of mental defect. After all, in his temporary rage he wasn't able to know right from wrong. Then he goes to a mental institution for the rest of his life. Or until they figure out how to calm his rage down so that he never again snaps when he sees a wolf killed.

But this isn't the modern world. Here, he gets his head chopped off on the spot. It shows restraint on the part of the Children of the Light because they are taking him to the city for a show trial first. He'll have time to make his peace with God, that is. Seriously, they all saw him do it so there is no need for a trial in their minds. He did it so let justice be done.

Perrin fighting the part of him that is connected to the wolves is prevalent over the next several books.

Le sigh. I just got to the part in The Great Hunt where Perrin is turning on his Wolf Powers again. I expect a slow, Perrin-heavy few chapters.

He's saying that as Perrin hated the axe and doesn't want to use it that he would use it more responsibly, less capriciously, than would a person who enjoyed cutting people open with a sharp implement. It would be like giving a flamethrower to a person and sending them out into a crowd of children. Do you give it to the person who hates what the flamethrower is, what it stands for, or to the person who jumps in glee and claps his hands and tells you he can't wait to light someone up?

No, no. I get what you're saying. I just don't buy it. Perrin doesn't want to use the axe. Okay, so don't give him the axe. Problem solved. By giving it to him you are forcing him to use it. Or to be tempted to use it, at least. The same with the flamethrower. Don't give it to the pyromaniac but don't give it to the guy who doesn't want to use it, either. Do you really want anybody with a flamethrower in a crowd full of children?

I get that Perrin would be more responsible with an axe because he doesn't want to use it than someone who does want to. That's a solid argument. However, he won't practice with it much, either. He'll hold it, look at it, wonder if he's got what it takes to use it. He'll swing it and it'll tear him up inside. Remember the Tinker's Parable of the Axe? Using the axe will hurt Perrin just as it hurts those he kills with it. Better to have no axe at all.

Besides, the guy who wants the axe? He'll use it, too. He'll go chopping and killing. The results will be the same, don't you think? Dead people and a bloody axe, whether you wanted to use it or not.

The whole point of that kind of comment.... "He doesn't want it so he'll do a better job".... is that the person who doesn't want the job is theoretically less likely to abuse what power he's given.

Theoretically. In practice? No way. The inexperienced king would be unable to rule effectively. People would worm their way into his good graces and manipulating him into furthering their own agendas. He's be unaware of legal tricks that would let others walk all over him. Ethics laws (if there were such a thing in this setting; I doubt it) would be confusing. "I took his money, sure, but I'm not supporting him. It was a gift!" So many tiny details to court life, who to trust and who to go to for information and who hates your home state and who would make a great Prime Minister, would take months and years to learn. Months and years that your kingdom falls apart. The baby king would not abuse his power, probably, but also wouldn't use it effectively, either. He'd be stuck, playing catch up, not doing much. This wouldn't happen to someone who wanted to be king, who took the time to learn what he needed to know before even turning in the application.

I wouldn't say it's a world without counterfeiters, however in this world a sword isn't quite the same thing as it would be now.

This is probably true. In the real world, swords were pretty uncommon. Peasants didn't have them. The upper middle class, maybe. This is the Renaissance so there's probably a middle class. Soldiers had them but do you think any self-respecting lord would let his peasants go home after a war with a sword? That's just asking for an armed uprising! They take a long time to train on properly, too. Better the common folk use spears and such.

But this isn't the real world. So maybe everyone's got a sword.

The heron in the WoT is the mark of a blademaster, an expert swordsman. It's not much of a spoiler, but the only way to become a blademaster and earn the heron is to defeat a blademaster in combat, or to be judged worthy by I think five other blademasters.

Yeah, I haven't gotten that far, yet. I don't want to comment on it until I learn more about it. The only thing I can think about, though, is who does this? Is there some sort of international Blademaster Committee that handles applicants? I get the Aes Sedai because they're like the Catholic Church with their small capital and heavy influence. But the blademasters? Is that an official part of a government body or does it have the same legitimacy as the Justin Bieber Fan Club?

Don't answer that, by the way. I don't hate spoilers but I'd like them kept to a minimum. Thanks!

A person with the Heron-mark sword on the other hand you automatically assume can and will kick your ass if you give them reason to.

Again, are there no counterfeiters? Having that sword shouldn't make him dangerous (rather, no more dangerous than any person with a sword). Does Rand look like a soldier? Does he have the focused eyes, the stance, the whole vibe of a blademaster? No. He looks like a teenage farmboy with a fancy sword.

In my opinion, that is. I can be swayed pretty easily on this.

I guess my comments about the Children and their authority were more semantics than anything else. Like I said you make a compelling point about them upholding the law vs the "good guys" doing bad things.

On the axe, I see your point about "if it bothers him then don't give it to him". I think Elyas recommends he keep it because he knows that Perrin and Egwene are in trouble and he'll likely need it to defend himself. Been awhile since tEoTW so I can't remember everything of how the conversation went.

On Kings I was thinking more along the lines of between two equally knowledgeable people who would make the more responsible ruler, the ambitious one who schemed to get there, or the person who would really rather not be the ruler. Again a trained person will generally be better at something than a novice (take your baseball example). No one's saying the TR boys would be better rulers in their current level of development than a person raised in the aristocracy from birth. Then again as you see later simply being a noble doesn't make one a good ruler.

This is probably true. In the real world' date=' swords were pretty uncommon. Peasants didn't have them. The upper middle class, maybe. This is the Renaissance so there's probably a middle class. Soldiers had them but do you think any self-respecting lord would let his peasants go home after a war with a sword? That's just asking for an armed uprising! They take a long time to train on properly, too. Better the common folk use spears and such.

 

But this isn't the real world. So maybe everyone's got a sword.[/quote']

 

I don't want to say they're common, but there are a lot of them. There are lots of armies from different countrires, merchant guards, and the equivalent of local police in the town guards. As to lords taking away swords from their peasants that's really not how this world works. I hate to say that, but I really can't think of a single ruler in this series who would disarm their departing soldiers for fear of a coup. Take Tam for instance. He joined the Illianer army, got his sword/training there, became a blademaster and then after the Aiel war went home to the TR with his sword stuck it in a chest and didn't touch it again for 20 some years.

 

Certainly everyone doesn't have a sword. Many common folk do use spears, pikes, axes, etc.

 

Yeah' date=' I haven't gotten that far, yet. I don't want to comment on it until I learn more about it. The only thing I can think about, though, is who does this? Is there some sort of international Blademaster Committee that handles applicants? I get the Aes Sedai because they're like the Catholic Church with their small capital and heavy influence. But the blademasters? Is that an official part of a government body or does it have the same legitimacy as the Justin Bieber Fan Club?

 

Don't answer that, by the way. I don't hate spoilers but I'd like them kept to a minimum. Thanks![/quote']

 

It wasn't a huge plot event, rather just a POV comment in someone's head that was made and then not mentioned again AFAIK. That's why I said it, it's really not a spoiler. I wouldn't say there's a IBC that takes applications for blademaster status. I'd say it's much more of a teacher student relationship where when the teacher thinks they're ready they would put something together for them to gain that level of acknowledgement. As to defeating another blademaster I guess the thought is if you can best someone with the heron mark then you deserve it.

 

Again' date=' are there no counterfeiters? Having that sword shouldn't make him dangerous (rather, no more dangerous than any person with a sword). Does Rand look like a soldier? Does he have the focused eyes, the stance, the whole vibe of a blademaster? No. He looks like a teenage farmboy with a fancy sword.

 

In my opinion, that is. I can be swayed pretty easily on this. [/quote']

 

I just want to clarify that when you're saying counterfeiters you're saying someone who added a heron onto an actual sword, and not someone carrying around a facimile sword which isn't actually for combat, right?

 

While I'm sure there are people who think well of themselves enough to have a heron added onto a sword, remember the type of world this is. Swords are expensive, so a regular person isn't going to go out and blow money on an awesome sword with custom engraving. So yes I imagine there are people holding heron-mark blades who don't deserve them. Still anyone who sees one is going to think that the person deserves it even if their eyes tell them it's just a farmboy and he can't possibly be a blademaster.

 

As to the .... presence of a blademaster. No for the most part Rand doesn't have it.... for the most part. In the first couple of books he does occasionally have that presence... for instance when confronting Bornhald and co. in Baerlon. His stance and demeanor were one of the things that gave the Whitecloaks pause to think that perhaps he was a blademaster.