Brandon Sanderson S2 Finale Reaction Video

[VooDooNut]

53 minutes ago, Elder_Haman said:

Exactly. What I remember him saying (and could be misremembering) was that when he felt like he was getting stuck with other stuff, he could always return to Androl. It was sort of his security blanket.

Unfortunately, that shows in the books. ☹️

[Samt]

5 hours ago, VooDooNut said:

Unfortunately, that shows in the books. ☹️

I recognize that the BS books feel different, but I actually really like them.  
 

Androl adds an interesting multidimensional aspect to the magic system.  RJ created talents as part of the magic system, but, other than Androl, we don’t really see that come into play. Channelers have talents in theory, but in practice the channelers with the most raw power are also the best at most things.  Androl adds the extra aspect where you can have a channelers who is generically weak but is the best at something specific.  It would have been interesting to see this aspect of the magic system play a bigger role in other parts of the series.

 

Of course, we see the powerful channelers have useful and interesting talents. But they are also just powerful channelers.  

Edited October 18, 2023 by Samt

[king of nowhere]

6 hours ago, VooDooNut said:

Unfortunately, that shows in the books. ☹️

I like sanderson style better, and i like androl and his take on magic. Channelers tend to be very inefficient in their use of the power. It makes sense for aes sedai, since they never faced a challenge that would force them to innovate. But in front of total war, people adapt quickly. Even aes sedai.

 

 

1 hour ago, Samt said:

 RJ created talents as part of the magic system, but, other than Androl, we don’t really see that come into play.  It would have been interesting to see this aspect of the magic system play a bigger role in other parts of the series.

We see it on a few kinswomen, but yes, not much.

By the way, i like how the show have most women fight with air. Women are supposed to be weak in fire, and while fire is easier to weaponize, it's better to take the stuff you are strong with and find ways to weaponize it than using a weak fire power

[Scarloc99]

16 hours ago, Elder_Haman said:

IIRC, in an interview he did long ago, BS explained that creating Androl was what allowed him to finish the books because it was something he could always come back to when lost.

For me this just highlights he was maybe the wrong choice, I would really love to see what a different author would do given access to all the same material at BS. 

[Scarloc99]

On 10/16/2023 at 11:26 PM, swollymammoth said:

Lol did you see in the most recent AMA he did where someone asked him if the power was going to have the the male/female, saidin/saidar split like in the books and he was like (paraphrased), "Well, we've gotta dripfeed that information to the audience." Can[t give them everything all at once!" as if the split was some crazy deep lore that needs multiple seasons of buildup to establish. 

 

RJ established the split right up front because, obviously, it's an absolutely fundamental aspect of the story and world, but Rafe obviously thinks that he knows better. Clearly, it's much more important to establish that Warders and Aes Sedai have polyamourous sexual relationships than to clarify a fundamental detail of the WoT universe. 

RJ established it with long exposition that was really outside of the story. Or POV thoughts, in the visual medium things need to be fed to the audience slower so they have time to land and grow, a viewer can’t go back and re read a paragraph to make sure they understand a thing. 

[Scarloc99]

On 10/17/2023 at 12:31 AM, Mirefox said:

A) This is multiple times now you’ve called me an anti-feminist, which is not bad hominem and a demonstration that you don’t understand the differences between traditional feminism and modern liberal feminism.

 

B) Rafe has literally said that he wants to update Jordan’s idea of feminism for the modern world.  That is literally an agenda.  It also suggests that Rage, at least, acknowledges a difference between feminist philosophy of 20 years ago and today and he reject the philosophy of the book as unfit for modern ideals.  De facto agenda.

Jordan’s book was forward thinking for the day it was written in, it is also very dated today. I think people took that Rafe statement and ran with it in the wrong way. Any work adapted is changed to make it more palatable for the viewing audience, lord of the rings added in a whole plot line for a female character at the expense of a male one, added in more about romance because it was based off a book that regardless of its pedigree in some ways has not aged well. 
 

A friend read wheel of time for then first time recently after watching the tv show, she commented on how sexist Robert Jordan was in his writing and how glad she is the tv show is not like that. Some things age well, some things don’t and when something hasn’t aged well you change it. I have no doubt had RJ written WOT now then there would be a lot less of men are from mars women are from Venus writing in the relationships and he would have been emboldened to have been more open with the existence of same sex relationships in the world. He took the risks he could in the 90’s and he stuck on lane and played it safe where he felt he needed to. But he did take risks, risks that now days feel like they are behind the times we live in. 

[Mailman]

57 minutes ago, Scarloc99 said:

Jordan’s book was forward thinking for the day it was written in, it is also very dated today. I think people took that Rafe statement and ran with it in the wrong way. Any work adapted is changed to make it more palatable for the viewing audience, lord of the rings added in a whole plot line for a female character at the expense of a male one, added in more about romance because it was based off a book that regardless of its pedigree in some ways has not aged well. 
 

A friend read wheel of time for then first time recently after watching the tv show, she commented on how sexist Robert Jordan was in his writing and how glad she is the tv show is not like that. Some things age well, some things don’t and when something hasn’t aged well you change it. I have no doubt had RJ written WOT now then there would be a lot less of men are from mars women are from Venus writing in the relationships and he would have been emboldened to have been more open with the existence of same sex relationships in the world. He took the risks he could in the 90’s and he stuck on lane and played it safe where he felt he needed to. But he did take risks, risks that now days feel like they are behind the times we live in. 

What exactly did she find sexist in his writing?

[SinisterDeath]

19 hours ago, king of nowhere said:

actors have the decision power to change the plot?

i ask because i genuinely don't know how that works

It depends.

 

If ya'll haven't watched this you need to.

 

[Scarloc99]

11 minutes ago, Mailman said:

What exactly did she find sexist in his writing?

The constant insistance that "men and women don't know what each other is thinking" the emphasis on the attractiveness of a women, the need to always emphasise "bosoms" very stereotypical ideas on the way men and women operate (men bluster around, women manipulate them to get things done), she actually said that for a fantasy series that is supposed to show women as being a central power in general women in the world still are not able to project real power in the story and instead have to rely on men to do that work for them with just a couple of exceptions, but even then Morgase is shown to have not had any real power when she was younger, having to use who she married to acquire it, and Tuon is presented as a petulant child, who yes is in charge, but is also a bad guy in it, she even said that Aes Sedai show this, an entire group of powerful females forced to restrict what they can do by a man, spending there lives manipulating and controlling because "thats what women are good at". Oh and nakedness, she said alot of female nakedness, which is ok in itself, why should a women getting topless be different to a man, but in her words "the author never bothers describing his male characters in the same way he does his female ones, uou never get a sense of the broadness of chest, or how they present themselves in the same way as you know for every female character if they are large or small breasted, pretty or plain etc. 

 

She did like that Ebou Dar at least is a culture where women have real genuine power, but said the fact that it is presented as being "odd" to outsiders emphasis how the rest of Randland is very much stuck in the "women stay at home" trope. She even found examples on characters I hadn't even thought of, Aludra, she asks would she have had as much trouble if she was a male illuminator. 

 

I don't agree with all her points, but I can't really disagree when she says the book feels like it was aimed at teenage/early 20's boys in much of the writing. I also can see her points that for all we try and say RJ created a world where women had power, they actually still only have that power largely at the behest of men. 

[Gothic Flame]

16 minutes ago, Mailman said:

What exactly did she find sexist in his writing?

That's a damn good question. I can only think it's the way that women dominate almost every aspect, especially the nations. 

 

[SinisterDeath]

Just now, Gothic Flame said:

That's a damn good question. I can only think it's the way that women dominate almost every aspect, especially the nations. 

 

See the post above yours.

[Gothic Flame]

8 minutes ago, Scarloc99 said:

The constant insistance that "men and women don't know what each other is thinking" the emphasis on the attractiveness of a women, the need to always emphasise "bosoms" very stereotypical ideas on the way men and women operate (men bluster around, women manipulate them to get things done), she actually said that for a fantasy series that is supposed to show women as being a central power in general women in the world still are not able to project real power in the story and instead have to rely on men to do that work for them with just a couple of exceptions, but even then Morgase is shown to have not had any real power when she was younger, having to use who she married to acquire it, and Tuon is presented as a petulant child, who yes is in charge, but is also a bad guy in it, she even said that Aes Sedai show this, an entire group of powerful females forced to restrict what they can do by a man, spending there lives manipulating and controlling because "thats what women are good at". Oh and nakedness, she said alot of female nakedness, which is ok in itself, why should a women getting topless be different to a man, but in her words "the author never bothers describing his male characters in the same way he does his female ones, uou never get a sense of the broadness of chest, or how they present themselves in the same way as you know for every female character if they are large or small breasted, pretty or plain etc. 

 

She did like that Ebou Dar at least is a culture where women have real genuine power, but said the fact that it is presented as being "odd" to outsiders emphasis how the rest of Randland is very much stuck in the "women stay at home" trope. She even found examples on characters I hadn't even thought of, Aludra, she asks would she have had as much trouble if she was a male illuminator. 

 

I don't agree with all her points, but I can't really disagree when she says the book feels like it was aimed at teenage/early 20's boys in much of the writing. I also can see her points that for all we try and say RJ created a world where women had power, they actually still only have that power largely at the behest of men. 

Doesn't sound to me that the books were the issue, more so than someone wanting to make an issue of the books.

*shrugs*

The person that did most of the editing was Jordan's wife. So..

Edited October 18, 2023 by Gothic Flame

[Samt]

2 hours ago, Scarloc99 said:

RJ established it with long exposition that was really outside of the story. Or POV thoughts, in the visual medium things need to be fed to the audience slower so they have time to land and grow, a viewer can’t go back and re read a paragraph to make sure they understand a thing. 

Lots of things that Liandrin and Moraine say in season 1 seem intentionally written to be vague on the subject of the Saidin/Saidar dichotomy when there doesn't seem to be an in universe reason for them to do so (unless the show Aes Sedai actually themselves don't understand).  This really isn't a particularly complicated idea that requires exposition.  Men and women channel differently.  That's all that the casual viewer needs to know and it would have fit organically into the story at lots of points.  

 

This vagueness is also what leads lots of book viewers to suspect that maybe they are changing something.  It would have been simple and straightforward to establish that nothing has changed and it would have made the show easier to understand (both for book readers and non).  The decision to not do this raises questions as to the intention.  

Edited October 18, 2023 by Samt

[Skipp]

4 minutes ago, Samt said:

Lots of things that Liandrin and Moraine say in season 1 seem intentionally written to be vague on the subject of the Saidin/Saidar dichotomy when there doesn't seem to be an in universe reason for them to do so (unless the show Aes Sedai actually themselves don't understand).  This really isn't a particularly complicated idea that requires exposition.  Men and women channel differently.  That's all that the casual viewer needs to know and it would have fit organically into the story at lots of points.  

 

This vagueness is also what leads lots of book viewers to suspect that maybe they are changing something.  It would have been simple and straightforward to establish that nothing has changed and it would have made the show easier to understand (both for book readers and non).  The decision to not do this raises questions as to the intention.  

They did miss an amazing opportunity to add a book quote into season 1.  In episode 8 Rand asks Moiraine to teach him and she could have responded with "I cannot teach you anymore than a bird could teach a fish to fly".  It was one of a handful of moments when I, as a book reader, thought there was a better line that could have been taken directly from the books.

[Samt]

1 hour ago, Mailman said:

What exactly did she find sexist in his writing?

Sexism is an impossible and meaningless standard without further refinement.  All non-crazy people treat men and women differently (most crazy people do, too).  This is true of social conservatives, but it's also a fundamental concept for the idea of LGBT even making sense.  

 

In regards to RJ and WoT, it's important to consider that fiction is not generally intended to be a projection of the author's ideal world.  The WoT world is intentionally very screwed up.  The PoV characters are intentionally biased and imperfect.  Changing the world to make it look more like Rafe's ideal world is somewhat unimaginative.

Edited October 18, 2023 by Samt

[SinisterDeath]

5 minutes ago, Samt said:

Changing the world to make it look more like Rafe's ideal world is somewhat unimaginative.

How on earth do you think the show is Rafe's Ideal world?

[HeavyHalfMoonBlade]

I think it possible that "they" (whoever that might be) did not want the series to get the publicity about having a gendered magic source before it was relevant to the story, or perhaps I should say, could not be avoided. So the publicity was about less controversial or potentially politically sensitive issues. Because it is certainly true that there is no reason at all to not have had one of Moiraine's saying about cats and dogs, or fish and birds or whatever, as that would not even require a gendered source, but simply different methods, though obviously still gendered. But still easy to understand.

 

It does come across as a bit clumsy, especially as it then makes up part of the surprising Moiraine is shielded story line.

[king of nowhere]

7 minutes ago, SinisterDeath said:

How on earth do you think the show is Rafe's Ideal world?

It is, in terms of social values.

But then, that, a common feature of almodt every work of fiction. We write people of the middle age thinking like modern ones. Renaissance writers who erote about people of the middle age wrote them with renaissance values. People writing of the future always project into the future fantastic technology, but the same culture.

I would praise the aiel as a nice exception, except they are also a charicature; that much cultural uniformity is not found even in dictatorships

[SinisterDeath]

9 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

It is, in terms of social values.

But then, that, a common feature of almodt every work of fiction. We write people of the middle age thinking like modern ones. Renaissance writers who erote about people of the middle age wrote them with renaissance values. People writing of the future always project into the future fantastic technology, but the same culture.

I would praise the aiel as a nice exception, except they are also a charicature; that much cultural uniformity is not found even in dictatorships

Everything we've seen in the show, just like in the books, isn't that of equality.
That isn't Rafe's ideal world.

The world in the show is out of balance. Just like it was in the books.

We haven't seen the weather out of balance, and the overly long winters/summers. But we have seen the world out of balanced along gender lines. E.g. cultures that Woman dominated (Tar Valon/Cairhen), and Man dominated cultures (white cloaks).

The only culture we saw in the show that seems semi-balanced was the Two Rivers. Unfortunately they barely explored that culture in the show. Perhaps we'll get that next season...

 

 

[Scarloc99]

1 hour ago, Gothic Flame said:

Doesn't sound to me that the books were the issue, more so than someone wanting to make an issue of the books.

*shrugs*

The person that did most of the editing was Jordan's wife. So..

That’s your opinion, re reading. Multiple times I can see a lot of the issues she points out, it is a very male centric book in terms of the prose etc. 

[Samt]

1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

How on earth do you think the show is Rafe's Ideal world?

I didn't say it was his ideal.  I said he has changed the world to look more like his ideal world.  He has significantly changed the sexual and gender values of the characters and world in a way that is almost certainly more like his ideal.  

[Scarloc99]

45 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

It is, in terms of social values.

But then, that, a common feature of almodt every work of fiction. We write people of the middle age thinking like modern ones. Renaissance writers who erote about people of the middle age wrote them with renaissance values. People writing of the future always project into the future fantastic technology, but the same culture.

I would praise the aiel as a nice exception, except they are also a charicature; that much cultural uniformity is not found even in dictatorships

I mean the Aiel as a people are almost a carbon copy of the freman from dune, Avi is very close to Chani as a character. But the history and how they became Aiel is what stands them out, and brilliantly shows how a culture can organically change over centuries. 

[king of nowhere]

2 hours ago, Scarloc99 said:

That’s your opinion, re reading. Multiple times I can see a lot of the issues she points out, it is a very male centric book in terms of the prose etc. 

i see you put high value on prose. I won't discuss that, as I generally don't even get those fine nuances.

but in terms of plot and personalities, i'd say calling wot male centric is blatantly wrong. sure, women in groups tend to start sniffing and pulling hairs. meanwhile, men in groups stop blinking and try to look dangerous.

power is split, with women getting probably the most - aes sedai making the difference. and no, aes sedai do not wield power through men. even if they did, if a woman manipulates a man in power to do his bidding, is the book misoginist because it shows a man in power? or is it misandrist because it shows the men as a gullible moron being manipulated?

ultimately, I would say that the books are balanced by being sexist against both genders. they do show a level of toxicity and strawmanning for both.

I do agree, though, on being happy that those parts were not included in the adaptation.

 

2 hours ago, SinisterDeath said:

Everything we've seen in the show, just like in the books, isn't that of equality.
That isn't Rafe's ideal world.

The world in the show is out of balance. Just like it was in the books.

We haven't seen the weather out of balance, and the overly long winters/summers. But we have seen the world out of balanced along gender lines. E.g. cultures that Woman dominated (Tar Valon/Cairhen), and Man dominated cultures (white cloaks).

The only culture we saw in the show that seems semi-balanced was the Two Rivers. Unfortunately they barely explored that culture in the show. Perhaps we'll get that next season...

how many human societies, historically, had power balance among genders? as far as I am aware, zero. men were generally in power, though the extent varied - in some societies a woman with no brothers could inherit a kingdom, in others women were little more than slaves.

the books were written in a time when women had achieved parity in law, but they were struggling to have that parity recognized in practice. and indeed, in the books there's plenty of conflict between men who want women to stay safe in the kitchen and women who want to be independent.

now we have a society where women can, at least ideally, do anything they want, in terms of career and life choices. and in the tv show, women can do anything they want.

 

in many ancient societies they had this idea that you could kill another person, and the law had no issues with it. on the other hand, the relatives of the deceased could then kill one of your relatives in retribution - and on like that in a feud, until both families agreed to make peace. it was considered a private business. and it was considered perfectly moral and just to kill somebody because 50 years before his great-uncle killed the father of your second cousin. I am not aware of any work of fiction where ancient people had this attitude - except for the aiel, but as I said, they have other issues. 

meanwhile, works of science fiction written in the past assumed in the far future women would still stay at home to cook for their husbands, though perhaps with a robot assistant. except for works written in the soviet union, where every advanced alien culture was organized in soviets, because that's the most advanced form of government according to the writers.

 

this is what i mean when I say that we project our cultural values in fiction.

[Ralph]

I do find it amusing that some people call the show misandrist for putting women in power more than in the books (Ila over Raen, Marine over Bran, Galldrian being a woman), yet I think it is clear that a significant point of the WoT is to show that the imbalance that has existed throughout history is equally problematic when it is the women in power. 

[swollymammoth]

3 hours ago, Scarloc99 said:

Multiple times I can see a lot of the issues she points out, it is a very male centric book in terms of the prose etc. 

Not really responding to you specifically here, just weighing in on this aspect of Jordan's writing. Mainly, I find it extremely strange that people consider these things (the descriptions of women particularly, but also other related aspects like the stereotypical male/female dynamics) are "male" in nature when it seems pretty clear that these things are actually much, much more common in fiction written by women.

 

Romance is the biggest literary genre in the world, almost exclusively written and read by women, and if you read most anything in that genre, you're not going to find 21st century gender politics represented very heavily haha The "heaving bosoms" and "brooding male" dynamic is a female creation and a hallmark of the single largest and most successful literary genre in the world. 

 

My point is that RJ was a fan of bodice ripper romance, and one of the first books that he pitched to Harriet was a bodice ripper (this pitch later became the Fallon Blood series). So yeah, RJ was a man, but the style that he uses in WoT is pretty obviously inspired by WOMEN'S FICTION. 

 

So yeah, RJ focuses a lot on his female characters' appearances and bosoms, but I think laying that at his feet as "sexist" or just "man writing" is sort of disingenuous when it's really just a feature of a genre that he liked and was drawing on while writing WoT.