Season 1 Discussion (Full Book Spoilers) v2.1

[ashi]

6 hours ago, notpropaganda73 said:

 

This is interesting to me, because I thought that they actually tried to emphasise this part of Perrin's journey in S1 by focussing solely on his relationship with the Tinkers? I'm not saying they did a good job (they really didn't, especially in the final two episodes), but wouldn't the fact they leaned in to his time with the Tinkers, him explaining the Way of the Leaf to Rand, the way he talks to Loial in ep8 about "doing nothing" and that struggle - isn't that all more pointed towards what you highlight here, rather than the "animal within"? 

Yes, good observation!

[Vartija]

Yeah, I didn't really notice it on first watch but it's starting to dawn on me that they purposefully made Perrin a bit of a pacifist Tinker in the first season. I think my book expectations kind of prevented me from seeing it on first watch. I kept being annoyed that he hadn't done anything with the axe, didn't go ham on Fain when he had the chance and overall was just very useless when it came to fighting. They took away his rage moment against the whitecloaks when they had the perfect setup for it and instead gave the violent moment to Egwene. In episodes 7 & 8 he was clearly hinting at being fine with the tinker philosophy. 

 

I still didn't like his arc in the first season but I can appreciate that the writers had thought it through.

 

[DojoToad]

10 hours ago, fra85uk said:

But in fact they will not change direction in S2. 

Correct

[Deviations]

2 hours ago, DojoToad said:

Correct

 

2 hours ago, DojoToad said:

But in fact they will not change direction in S2. 

All true.  Whatever the book guru's name is that is advising the show said, they were all thrilled with episode 8.  I'm not in ANY WAY saying she should get or should have gotten the hateful, dangerous feedback that she has, but the fact that while she clearly knows people are upset and she's clearly happy with the show tells me they will not 'course correct'.

[fra85uk]

Previously on Rafe of time

9 hours ago, fra85uk said:

Blip 

Prrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.......

Scrrrrrrrrrrrr....

slapping frantically the screen

 

Oh, we are in the writing room.

 

Rafe: "Season 2! Let's start rolling. I was thinking...cold open ep.1: Lews Therin is madly walking among the debris of his house, destruction and dead bodies everywhere and at some point..."

Anonymous writer 1: "he meets with Isham..."

Rafe: "Fired! Next one in please. He meets with Latra who briefly releases him from his madness to say <Ah Ah I told you so, you stupid arrogant man> " .

Anonymous writer 2 while taking notes: " <Ah Ah> with a solemn tone?"

Rafe: "Think about Nelson"

AW2: "Mandela?"

Rafe "Simpson's Nelson, you ****. Next!"

AW3: "ehmm...and then LTT suicides and creates Dragonmount?"

Rafe: "No, this would be sooooooooooooooooo cliché. Latra nukes LTT and creates Dragonmount. Then, looking at the mayhem from distance <Farewell, Dragon reborn. Our only hope now  is that the Dragon Reborn Reborn will be a female>"

 

To be continued

 

Now, notwithstanding some unfair criticism but a single showcloak that hurt me deeply (I am looking at you DaddyFinn), in my immense goodness, I have to share the magnificent discoveries available by the use of my machine.

So let's go back in the writing room....

 

Rafe: "Ok, the cold open is sorted. Now let's think about the main characters"

AW3: "So, what aboout Ran.."

Gun-shot

Rafe: "How many times have I to repeat that this name should not be pronounced here?"

Door opening, trembling figure entering

Rafe looking at the newcomer: "Now, you know that you made oaths. You thought that they were just mere words...right?"

AW4: "No, my lord"

Rafe: "Then take notes. Moraine is stilled or shielded, who cares? I have not decided yet but the important thing is that she cannot channel. Do you understand what does it mean?"

AW4 "Ehm, no my lord"

Rafe: "It's time for her to uncover new skills!"

AW4: "maybe we can have Lan training Moiraine with the sword?"

Rafe: " Pitiful. That's why I am the showrunner and you will probably die in the next 15 minutes, but I commend you for your courage"

AW4: "Please, my lord show my the way"

Rafe: "First: if Moiraine would want to become a swordmaster, she would need no man to teach her. Second: Pike's contract does not include action scenes (S1 first episode I made it count as dance scene) and I have already spent half of the budget in temporary tattoos for Seanchan extras. Third..."

 

Door opening with a bang, dark figure approaching

"How is going Rafe?" the voice whispered

 

To be continued

     

[Deviations]

I'm crying.

[orbops]

On 1/11/2022 at 12:57 PM, MColson said:

I often re-read favorite books. The first time I read a book I find myself getting swept up in the more exciting parts of the narrative. The second time I may find some nuance missed during the initial read.

I wish I had enough time to re-read my favorite books, but since I read about 20 books per year, I want to read new titles from new authors. Otherwise if I was rereading my favorites, I'd still be reading all the Asimov, Heinlein, and even David Eddings books.

[orbops]

21 hours ago, ashi said:

Quote

The Shadow Rising, chapter 13, Rumors

"The rumor is, my Lord, that the Whitecloaks have gone into the Two Rivers. Hunting the Dragon Reborn, it’s said. Though of course, that cannot be, since the Lord Dragon is here in Tear.” ... “These rumors can run very wild, my Lord. Perhaps it’s only wind in a bucket. The same rumor claims the Whitecloaks are after some Darkfriend with yellow eyes, too."
[...]
[Perrin] "A hundred reasons to stay, but the one reason to go outweighs them. The Whitecloaks are in the Two Rivers, and they’ll hurt people trying to find me. I can stop it, if I go."

Expand  

 

And Perrin does feel that he needs to give up his life to them in answer for his crimes.

 

Quote

The Shadow Rising, chapter 14, Customs of Mayene

 

Staring at the splintered gash his axe had made in the door, he found himself telling it what he could not tell her. “I killed Whitecloaks. They would have killed me if I hadn’t, but they still call it murder. I’m going home to die, Faile. That’s the only way I can stop them hurting my people. Let them hang me. I cannot let you see that. I can’t. You might even try to stop it, and then they’d . . . .”

I am very impressed with your knowledge and detail that you can find specific quotes from individual books. It reminds me (in a good way of the devotion WoT readers have) of the SNL skit with Kirk... 

 

Edited January 12, 2022 by orbops

[RextheDog]

regarding this SN issue.

 

is there a call for her to show the abusive texts....wouldnt it be prudent to show it actually happened, i have a lot of distrust for celebrity claims....(slightly different, but still)....this is not victim blaming, but in order to legitimise the claim you should show evidence.

 

i dont feel i need to point out my opinion on internet abuse, but i also feel just by claiming 'ive been abused and its all men' is a really dangerous claim to make....

 

as a male, i wouldnt want to be painted as an abusive sexist just because i didnt like a womens work and let her know on social media

 

at the minimum if death threats have been made she should file an official complaint and hand over the evidence to the authorities, theres no point in calling that a futile effort, lots of things that brave oppressed people have done in the history of mankind seemed futile as a stand alone action, but were the beginning of change.

 

 

[KakitaOCU]

31 minutes ago, RextheDog said:

is there a call for her to show the abusive texts....wouldnt it be prudent to show it actually happened, i have a lot of distrust for celebrity claims....(slightly different, but still)....this is not victim blaming, but in order to legitimise the claim you should show evidence.

Two aspects here.  

#1: There may be a call to provide those to any leo that's working a case.  They don't owe it to us.
#2: The whole point of recent pushes has been that you don't immediately demand proof or it didn't happen.   Legitimizing a claim is for courts and legal issues, not here.
 

33 minutes ago, RextheDog said:

i dont feel i need to point out my opinion on internet abuse, but i also feel just by claiming 'ive been abused and its all men' is a really dangerous claim to make....

Everything before the word but...  yeah...
Stating that you have been abused and that all the abusers were male is stating a situation, it's not a dangerous claim.
 

35 minutes ago, RextheDog said:

as a male, i wouldnt want to be painted as an abusive sexist just because i didnt like a womens work and let her know on social media

Fun fact though, you're not painted as an abusive sexist for disagreeing.  If you didn't make actual attacks and criticisms then you're not part of the problem.  "All my abusers were male" is not remotely the same thing as "All the males who messaged me are abusers."
 

37 minutes ago, RextheDog said:

at the minimum if death threats have been made she should file an official complaint and hand over the evidence to the authorities, theres no point in calling that a futile effort, lots of things that brave oppressed people have done in the history of mankind seemed futile as a stand alone action, but were the beginning of change.

Yes, reports should be filed.  It may be a futile effort (it will be, because if she files locally, they'll dump the case because it's not their jurisdiction.  If she files in the location the abuser lives they'll tell her no, she needs to file with her local authorities who can send it to them.  Which they won't), but it should still be done.

But what does that have to do with the rest.  Are you suggesting she should file a report and not say anything anywhere else?   I don't understand the purpose of the fourth paragraph with the rest.


 

[Weird_Old_Lady]

3 hours ago, RextheDog said:

regarding this SN issue.

 

is there a call for her to show the abusive texts....wouldnt it be prudent to show it actually happened, i have a lot of distrust for celebrity claims....(slightly different, but still)....this is not victim blaming, but in order to legitimise the claim you should show evidence.

 

i dont feel i need to point out my opinion on internet abuse, but i also feel just by claiming 'ive been abused and its all men' is a really dangerous claim to make....

 

as a male, i wouldnt want to be painted as an abusive sexist just because i didnt like a womens work and let her know on social media

 

at the minimum if death threats have been made she should file an official complaint and hand over the evidence to the authorities, theres no point in calling that a futile effort, lots of things that brave oppressed people have done in the history of mankind seemed futile as a stand alone action, but were the beginning of change.

 

 

If it is honest to say a thing (such as "all of my abusers are men" and it is 100% true in mine and many other cases) then to whom exactly is the statement dangerous? The abuser? The abused? The innocent bystander? Please explain. 

[ilovezam]

5 hours ago, RextheDog said:

regarding this SN issue.

 

is there a call for her to show the abusive texts....wouldnt it be prudent to show it actually happened, i have a lot of distrust for celebrity claims....(slightly different, but still)....this is not victim blaming, but in order to legitimise the claim you should show evidence.

 

i dont feel i need to point out my opinion on internet abuse, but i also feel just by claiming 'ive been abused and its all men' is a really dangerous claim to make....

 

as a male, i wouldnt want to be painted as an abusive sexist just because i didnt like a womens work and let her know on social media

 

at the minimum if death threats have been made she should file an official complaint and hand over the evidence to the authorities, theres no point in calling that a futile effort, lots of things that brave oppressed people have done in the history of mankind seemed futile as a stand alone action, but were the beginning of change.

It's a difficult and iffy topic, but I think she has no incentive to provide any further clarification. People are just going to tear it apart in analysis and might just conclude differently than she did/wanted. 

 

By simply asserting that "I guarantee you they're only hating on me this much because I'm a woman, Brandon doesn't get so much hate!" lots of people are now willing to defend her regardless of context. 

 

Personally, I think "man hating on a woman", while reprehensible, doesn't automatically constitute sexism. There's no means of telling what the "haters'" broader attitudes are towards either men or women. 

[RextheDog]

12 hours ago, KakitaOCU said:

Two aspects here.  

#1: There may be a call to provide those to any leo that's working a case.  They don't owe it to us.
#2: The whole point of recent pushes has been that you don't immediately demand proof or it didn't happen.   Legitimizing a claim is for courts and legal issues, not here.
 

Everything before the word but...  yeah...
Stating that you have been abused and that all the abusers were male is stating a situation, it's not a dangerous claim.
 

Fun fact though, you're not painted as an abusive sexist for disagreeing.  If you didn't make actual attacks and criticisms then you're not part of the problem.  "All my abusers were male" is not remotely the same thing as "All the males who messaged me are abusers."
 

Yes, reports should be filed.  It may be a futile effort (it will be, because if she files locally, they'll dump the case because it's not their jurisdiction.  If she files in the location the abuser lives they'll tell her no, she needs to file with her local authorities who can send it to them.  Which they won't), but it should still be done.

But what does that have to do with the rest.  Are you suggesting she should file a report and not say anything anywhere else?   I don't understand the purpose of the fourth paragraph with the rest.


 

 

ok. so in your eyes, and quite a few others judging by the likes you have recieved, theres no reason to doubt (not even doubt, just ask to look at what has her so rattled), its all just to be taken in good faith.

 

fair enough, i can accept that.

 

 

 

 

 

[EmreY]

13 hours ago, KakitaOCU said:

to any leo

 

Honest question, what is a leo?  From context I'm assuming some sort of public prosecutor?

Edited January 14, 2022 by EmreY

[Mailman]

47 minutes ago, EmreY said:

 

Honest question, what is a leo?  From context I'm assuming some sort of public prosecutor?

Law Enforcement Officer

[KakitaOCU]

5 hours ago, RextheDog said:

ok. so in your eyes, and quite a few others judging by the likes you have recieved, theres no reason to doubt (not even doubt, just ask to look at what has her so rattled), its all just to be taken in good faith.

 

fair enough, i can accept that.

Essentially.  To be fair, that doesn't mean blindly just take anything said, but the regrettable truth is that there's been a pattern and habit of taking our inclination to look for proof and drag it to a dark place.  Abuse can have an affect on people and they process it differently and ultimately the only people that need to be involved are those that the victim choose to share with and/or any authorities involved in actual cases.

It's also a matter of looking at precedent and how we treat other situations.  If I were to come out and publicly say that I had been attacked by a group of people of some specific trait (gender, ethnicity, job, etc) the stats suggest that while, yeah, innocent until proven guilty, there is not much chance of people immediately doubting me or accusing me of faking or being wrong.  Yet Sarah makes a statement that she has received threats and harrassment from a group of people of a specific trait (In this case gender) and some have the immediate response of "Uh huh, let's see proof, how is this politicized, how do we know that happened"
 

4 hours ago, EmreY said:

Honest question, what is a leo?  From context I'm assuming some sort of public prosecutor?

 

Mailman beat me to it, but yeah, sorry, acronyms become habit in certain lines of work.

[Mirefox]

It’s no secret that I thought the show was an unforgivable desecration of the source material.  That said, I decided that I’d give the series another watch while I run in the treadmill to see if I see it any differently with tempered expectations.

 

My first random thought is that the Women’s Circle is a bunch of sociopaths.  Their initiation ceremony consists of pushing a woman off a cliff into class 4 rapids with cliffs on all sides instead of banks.  The mortality rate for this ceremony had to be greater than zero.  Can Two Rivers folk even swim?  Bran told Eg he was worried about her so there is at least a known risk.

 

And I think I was more horrified that Rand casually threw his bow on the rocky ground than when my toddler threw my phone in the bath.

Edited January 14, 2022 by Mirefox

[AdamA]

1 minute ago, Mirefox said:

My first random thought is that the Women’s Circle is a bunch of sociopaths.  Their initiation ceremony consists of pushing a woman off a cliff into category 4 rapids with cliffs on all sides instead of banks.  The mortality rate for this ceremony had to be greater than zero.  Can Two Rivers folk even swim?  Bran told Eg he was worried about her so there is at least a known risk.

I'd totally forgotten about this by now, but from having done a lot of whitewater rafting in the past, along with all the concomitant training on how to survive falling into the rapids, that definitely stood out to me. What Nynaeve told her about how to position yourself was basically correct, but a half second of safety briefing with no practice right before pushing you in isn't exactly how we do it in the real world. Mortality rate is definitely nonzero for this ceremony.

[Cauthonfan4]

16 minutes ago, AdamA said:

Mortality rate is definitely nonzero for this ceremony.

Which is weird because in ghe books the women's circle was shown as the voice of reason and how they tried to keep the men from doing wool headed and dangerous stuff. Yet they push people off a cliff?

[Deviations]

25 minutes ago, Cauthonfan4 said:

Which is weird because in ghe books the women's circle was shown as the voice of reason and how they tried to keep the men from doing wool headed and dangerous stuff. Yet they push people off a cliff?

But remember, we're not in Kansas anymore toto!  Any lighthearted banter or goofy observations about the other sex doesn't exist in the grimdark.

[Cauthonfan4]

Just now, Deviations said:

But remember, we're not in Kansas anymore toto!  Any lighthearted banter or goofy observations about the other sex doesn't exist in the grimdark

My bad I forgot that this was rafes wheel of prime, not Jordan's wheel of time.

[Humbugged2]

On 11/28/2021 at 6:02 PM, Jaysen Gore said:

Yeah, oops - try it this way. Mat could sense the Fade's evil, almost the same way the Aes Sedai could

I think it was the dagger sensing the evil

 

On 11/28/2021 at 8:48 AM, RhienneAgain said:

 

Yeah, I think the one aspect of it I've found a bit disappointing is that in the books I got such a strong sense that each area had its own ethnicity (i.e. a Domain would look very different from a Cairhienin) and that doesn't seem to have been replicated in the shows. It was part of what made the world feel real to me. I can understand why that would have been tough to replicate though.

No ,areas had the same accents and clothing according to the author not the same skin colour

[ilovezam]

1 hour ago, Mirefox said:

My first random thought is that the Women’s Circle is a bunch of sociopaths.  Their initiation ceremony consists of pushing a woman off a cliff into class 4 rapids with cliffs on all sides instead of banks.  The mortality rate for this ceremony had to be greater than zero.

It's super dangerous, and I'm not even very sure what the ceremony is supposed to represent. Strong women have good fortune?

Like the surrendering to the river thing was pretty cool if they're still going to be doing saidar in the next season, I guess.

[ilovezam]

1 hour ago, KakitaOCU said:

Yet Sarah makes a statement that she has received threats and harrassment from a group of people of a specific trait (In this case gender) and some have the immediate response of "Uh huh, let's see proof, how is this politicized, how do we know that happened"

I think overwhelmingly people here agree that sending hate to her is messed up. The point of contention is whether these haters would have done the same to a male book lore expert, because she claims that she knows they wouldn't have. Being an asshole to an individual woman makes you an asshole, but sexism entails and requires a broader prejudice against her entire gender, and I'm not sure why people are so quick and confident to assume that.

Edited January 14, 2022 by ilovezam

[KakitaOCU]

25 minutes ago, ilovezam said:

The point of contention is whether these haters would have done the same to a male book lore expert, because she claims that she knows they wouldn't have.

That is one point of contention and one I haven't weighed in on because I only have experience and feelings, not hard facts, so my voice adds little.  Suffice to say I believe and agree with her assessment but don't feel value in arguing it.

However, the post you are quoting is in response to someone who did flat out say she should provide proof to the community.

As an aside, the reason I am so "quick" and confident in assuming sexism is due to witnessing it over and over again.  These threads here have been relatively calm, but I've seen posts pushing an "agenda" to diminish men, posts insisting the men are being destroyed to prop up women.  Another thread on this subject was shut down with the mod flat out pointing out that clearly several users don't understand being a woman on the internet.  

As for the fan reaction at large?  Yeah, I've seen non-stop sexist behavior in people bashing the show on FB and other places. 

It exists, that it is toned down here doesn't really change that.

Edited January 14, 2022 by KakitaOCU