The Show Has Been Cancelled

[king of nowhere]

1 hour ago, Elder_Haman said:

We don’t know that he turned them gay. I’m fairly certain he intended them to be bi. 
 

And, before screaming at me that they weren’t bi in the books either, I think there is a good faith interpretation of the books that sees their relationship as having romantic undertones. You can dislike it, but you can find textual support for all of the LGB relationships in the show. 

on the other hand, elayne and aviendha had a pretty unique relationship.

on some level, they were closer than most married couples. they did everything together. they slept together hugging each other, they bathed together, they ate together, they lived together.

sex was the one thing they didn't do together, and that made their relationship different and more interesting. if they become lesbian loves, they are just that; another romantic relation, not very different from dozens of others.

 

i don't mind representation and diversity, but if there is one thing that turns me off (aside from when it's forced and poorly done) is how every relationship is turned romantical. how it seems you can't be close with someone without shtupping them.

I have three very good friends, and if I was a woman, or they were women, i'd try to date them. but i'm a straight man, and i have absolutely zero romantic inclination towards them. I call them honorary brothers, i am extremely close, but i have no romantic inclination.

but no, if my life was turned into a movie adaptation rafe would have me have gay sex with all three.

I don't like how in baldurs gate 3 you can date each and every companion, regardless of gender or species. you have a dozen of them, and not a single one will tell you "sorry, you are a great friend but i'm not into women/humans/tieflings/whatever".

i like how in mass effect 3 you have a bunch of romantic options that includes straight men, straight women, bisexual men, bisexual women, and even a straight gay and a straight lesbian. that's actual representation. everyone lusting over everyone else just isn't.

and so, I didn't like how elayne and aviendha's special bromance was turned into just another couple of lovers. I didn't like how it was suggested that lan join the alanna trio and start having sex with other men without any consideration for whether he'd be interested in it - especially because, as far as i know, doing a similar suggestion telling a straight lesbian to try men would be considered rude and insensitive, especially when worded like that. I didn't like how ishamael made suggestions over perrin.

each of the three elements, taken in isolation, i would accept without problems.

but all together? they point not towards diversity and representation, but to a world populated entirely by bisexual nymphomaniacs.

25 minutes ago, WoTwasThat said:

 

Your analysis is SPOT ON. There were so many problems with this show, but for me the biggest by far was the blatant departure from canon re gender of the Dragon. This undermined the entire mythology that made the books so great.

So, you are saying that the show failed not because of general first season weakness, pacing problems, the "who is the dragon" mystery resulting in poor characterization for the EF5, the bad ending they had to pull out because of covid and actor departure, poor special effects in S1, poor marketing, or any of the actual problems.

no, you are saying that the show failed because moiraine didn't know whether the dragon could be a woman or a man - which doesn't even imply any change to the mythology, just that aes sedai lost much knowledge. there's even siuan saying at some point, the prophecies are translations of translations, who knows what they meant originally.

not that people who didn't read the books would have much grasp over the whole mythology thing in the first place.

let's be realistic. the decision to keep the identity of the dragon a "secret" worked poorly because it impacted characterization. but the stuff about gender, it had absolutely zero impact on the success of the show. at most it turned away a few bookcloaks, which would have been turned away by all the other changes anyway.

[WoTwasThat]

27 minutes ago, Elder_Haman said:

I guess I'd ask you to be specific about which "decision" you're talking about.

If you're talking about the decision to base the entirety of Season One around a contrived 'which one of these characters is the Dragon' plot, then yes. That was a really poor decision and ultimately is what doomed the show.

 

If you're saying that Rafe - and Rafe alone - chose to structure the plot that way for political purposes, you're gonna have to bring me more evidence. As I said above, the structure of season one feels like it was written by committee.

 

Well, I think we're largely in agreement then! I'm not sure it was the only thing that doomed the show, but it was probably the biggest thing.

[Elder_Haman]

6 minutes ago, WoTwasThat said:

 

Well, I think we're largely in agreement then! I'm not sure it was the only thing that doomed the show, but it was probably the biggest thing.

Every one of the things you don't like ultimately served that part of the plot. (Although I'd argue the prologue would have been an extremely poor way to start the series. I will die on this hill: It should have started with Gitara's foretelling and the cold open fight scene on Dragonmount.) 

[Elder_Haman]

11 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

sex was the one thing they didn't do together

This would be a stronger argument if ALL of the sex in WoT wasn't implied.

 

For example, we know that Tylin and Mat are having sex, but we never see it. So when a book gives you two female characters who are essentially "sister wives" that 

13 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

were closer than most married couples ... did everything together ... slept together hugging each other ... bathed together ... ate together [and] lived together[,]

 

you can't be upset when people take this as an implication that the two are romantically involved. When you add this to RJ's winking toward other lesbian relationships (pillow friends), you can see where people could read a romantic relationship between the two.

 

Now I happen to agree with you. I do not believe that RJ intended the relationship between Avi and Elayne to be a romantic one. But I do understand why others see those elements and I have a hard time getting mad about a writer wanting to roll with that interpretation.

[WoTwasThat]

7 minutes ago, Elder_Haman said:

Every one of the things you don't like ultimately served that part of the plot. (Although I'd argue the prologue would have been an extremely poor way to start the series. I will die on this hill: It should have started with Gitara's foretelling and the cold open fight scene on Dragonmount.) 

 

Why wouldn't the prologue have worked? When I read it for the first time, I was like "ok, this is weird and awesome and I LOVE it!" In my mind, you've got a ruined palace, dead Ilyena, crazy LT, gloating Ishy, get to see a GATEWAY for the first time (and only time in the next two seasons, btw), Rand blows himself up into Dragonmount, cue opening credits and that badass GOT music!!!! Seriously, this show deserved a much better title sequence and music.

[Elder_Haman]

1 minute ago, WoTwasThat said:

Why wouldn't the prologue have worked?

Did you see Winter Dragon?

It's too disconnected from the main plotline to be effective as a television hook. I think the prologue needed to be in the show at some point. But from the perspective of new viewers (as opposed to readers, who are different animals with different habits), the foretelling draws viewers immediately into the story, focuses it on the main character, explains Moiraine's purpose, and gives everyone an instantly recognizable focus point for subsequent world building.

[king of nowhere]

5 minutes ago, Elder_Haman said:

This would be a stronger argument if ALL of the sex in WoT wasn't implied.

 

For example, we know that Tylin and Mat are having sex, but we never see it. So when a book gives you two female characters who are essentially "sister wives" that 

 

 

no, it's an entirely different thing.

with mat and tylin, we have the "fade to black". or mat thinking of what tylin did with the pink ribbons. it's not shown, but it's not just "implied".

with sister wives it's mostly implied, and i suppose it depends on the specific marriage whether the two women have sex with each other, or they are merely very good friends. but we don't see much of the life of a sister-wife.

 

elayne and aviendha are different because they are both main characters, and we spend a lot of time in their pow, even intimate moments. we never get any hint that the two are having sex, though i'd certainly call romantic some of what they do. compare with rand and his raging fire felt through the bond, or something like that. compare with nynaeve thinking her nights with lan are glorious. those are character that have sex, and they are shown very different than elayne and aviendha.

 

also, i repeat: i don't have a specific problem with their relationship, if it was just that - well, except maybe that it was something unique. i have a general problem with several lines of dialogue in several places implying everyone in that world is a bisexual nymphomaniac.

i have a general problem with a bunch of media trying to tell inclusive stories, but ending up with the implication that everyone is a bisexual nymphomaniac.

[WoTwasThat]

48 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

So, you are saying that the show failed not because of general first season weakness, pacing problems, the "who is the dragon" mystery resulting in poor characterization for the EF5, the bad ending they had to pull out because of covid and actor departure, poor special effects in S1, poor marketing, or any of the actual problems.

 

no, you are saying that the show failed because moiraine didn't know whether the dragon could be a woman or a man - which doesn't even imply any change to the mythology, just that aes sedai lost much knowledge. there's even siuan saying at some point, the prophecies are translations of translations, who knows what they meant originally.

not that people who didn't read the books would have much grasp over the whole mythology thing in the first place.

 

let's be realistic. the decision to keep the identity of the dragon a "secret" worked poorly because it impacted characterization. but the stuff about gender, it had absolutely zero impact on the success of the show. at most it turned away a few bookcloaks, which would have been turned away by all the other changes anyway.

 

I agree with you that the show had many problems. Which you probably have now seen me acknowledge in a post I made after the one you quoted. But yeah, I think the departure from canon on gender of the Dragon was the biggest problem, and pretty closely related to your "who is the Dragon" mystery issue.

 

And I think the departure from canon on gender of the Dragon was a much bigger problem than you are acknowledging. Let me explain it this way... As I've mentioned previously, reincarnation and the gendered magic system where one gender has been tainted is the BACKBONE of the story. The Dragon will be reborn as a man doomed to madness because of a taint his actions contributed to, and he will be both destroyer and savior as a result. It is a highly original concept in fantasy, and it is AWESOME.

 

BUT, the Red Ajah continue to hunt male channelers, even though much of the Aes Sedai (certainly Moiraine, Siuan, the rest of the Blues, likely the Greens and many more) know full damn well that they could be gentling the Dragon Reborn! That's a kickass concept!!! Which the show immediately proceeds to piss all over by, at best, making Moiraine a bumbling moron who didn't know the prophecy. At worst, it makes the Reds much more justified in their actions because, hey, if the Dragon comes back as a gurl no big deal. It undercuts the CENTRAL CONFLICT of the story.

 

Oh, and sorry, I'm never gonna buy the Covid excuse for the botched ending to the Season 1. Not after everything else they botched along the way. The terrible ending had absolutely nothing to do with not depicting Tarwin's Gap as a massive fight scene. People forget, the book only depicts Tarwin's Gap for less than a page, and mostly in the past tense. Rand shows up and vaporizes the army. That's it. They could have spent 10 seconds of CGI on that in the show. Instead, the show completely changes the entire Eye sequence so as to render it unrecognizable. Covid didn't cause Rand and Moiraine to walk alone into the Blight for a little monologuing with Ishamael.

Edited May 30 by WoTwasThat

[king of nowhere]

14 minutes ago, WoTwasThat said:

 

Why wouldn't the prologue have worked? When I read it for the first time, I was like "ok, this is weird and awesome and I LOVE it!" In my mind, you've got a ruined palace, dead Ilyena, crazy LT, gloating Ishy, get to see a GATEWAY for the first time (and only time in the next two seasons, btw), Rand blows himself up into Dragonmount, cue opening credits and that badass GOT music!!!! Seriously, this show deserved a much better title sequence and music.

 

10 minutes ago, Elder_Haman said:

Did you see Winter Dragon?

It's too disconnected from the main plotline to be effective as a television hook. I think the prologue needed to be in the show at some point. But from the perspective of new viewers (as opposed to readers, who are different animals with different habits), the foretelling draws viewers immediately into the story, focuses it on the main character, explains Moiraine's purpose, and gives everyone an instantly recognizable focus point for subsequent world building.

I disliked the prologue the first time i read it. I was like "this makes no sense and I can't understand anything!". i read the book despite the prologue, not because of it.

on the other hand, I will mitigate my opinion on this by stating that I have no flipping idea on what would be a good first scene. it's hard, when you have such a large world, to introduce it to readers. in fact, the starting moiraine voiceover was at least effective of conveying what the main plot would be about, it probably wasn't the best way to start but it was a fairly good one.

 

on the other hand, following through with pushing egwene into a river was a terrible way to go on

[WoTwasThat]

15 minutes ago, Elder_Haman said:

Did you see Winter Dragon?

It's too disconnected from the main plotline to be effective as a television hook. I think the prologue needed to be in the show at some point. But from the perspective of new viewers (as opposed to readers, who are different animals with different habits), the foretelling draws viewers immediately into the story, focuses it on the main character, explains Moiraine's purpose, and gives everyone an instantly recognizable focus point for subsequent world building.

 

First, don't you dare disrespect my man Billy ZANE and his Oscar-worthy performance in Winter Dragon. I'll happily put that up against Rafe's entire Season One.

 

Second and slightly more seriously, I don't think the low budget slipshod ashcan of a Winter Dragon "pilot" is good evidence that the Prologue couldn't have worked as... exactly that: a prologue to a fully developed show. The audience would have made the connection to the prologue by the end of the first episode when Tam is fever-dreaming his story of finding Rand on the slopes of Dragonmount.

[king of nowhere]

11 minutes ago, WoTwasThat said:

 

As I've mentioned previously, reincarnation and the gendered magic system where one gender has been tainted is the BACKBONE of the story. The Dragon will be reborn as a man doomed to madness because of a taint his actions contributed to, and he will be both destroyer and savior as a result. It is a highly original concept in fantasy, and it is AWESOME.

 

BUT, the Red Ajah continue to hunt male channelers, even though much of the Aes Sedai (certainly Moiraine, Siuan, the rest of the Blues, likely the Greens and many more) know full damn well that they could be gentling the Dragon Reborn! That's a kickass concept!!!

ok, here we find some common ground. I agree on that, they should have pushed more on this concept (EDIT which the prologue absolutely failed convey to me, as that information was lost among so much weirdness that I had no idea what was supposed to be important and what was just decoration). which was weakened by their attempt to present a dragon woman as a viable alternative.

Quote

Which the show immediately proceeds to piss all over by, at best, making Moiraine a bumbling moron who didn't know the prophecy.

i don't know, i think the issue of "the prophecies are translations of translaions or second-hand copies of third-hand quotes, so we are unsure of the details" also work. I liked it, and find that the question of "is this prophecy exact, or was it misquoted at some point" is missing from the books.

 

Quote

At worst, it makes the Reds much more justified in their actions because, hey, if the Dragon comes back as a gurl no big deal. It undercuts the CENTRAL CONFLICT of the story.

i believe the reds are thinking along the lines of "if he's the real dragon reborn, then his ta'veren nature will prevent us from gentling him. something will happen. we don't really risk killing the real deal by acciden"

incidentally, i blame the show for name-dropping ta'veren without explanation, then never explaining well what it means, and never mentioning the concept in the next seasons when it would make a lot of sense.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 30 by king of nowhere

[WoTwasThat]

26 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

I believe the reds are thinking along the lines of "if he's the real dragon reborn, then his ta'veren nature will prevent us from gentling him. something will happen. we don't really risk killing the real deal by acciden"

incidentally, i blame the show for name-dropping ta'veren without explanation, then never explaining well what it means, and never mentioning the concept in the next seasons when it would make a lot of sense.

 

This is a little controversial for sure, but I always thought "ta'varen" was one of the dumbest concepts in the books and I would have been happy if they had dropped it from the show altogether. Basically, it just stands for "massive plot convenience."

 

As for what the Reds were thinking... do the books ever explain this? I assumed they basically thought the prophecy was bullshit. Which is why Moiraine and Siuan's secret plot to locate and train the DR, working directly at odds to the Reds, was so interesting. And again, the show pissed all over this plotline with Moiraine's musings in the very first episode and "gee, which one of us do you think is the Dragon" idle campfire talk in the second episode. Dumb dumb dumb!

Edited May 30 by WoTwasThat

[fearbrog]

4 hours ago, Ralph said:

I think they mean Lan

It's Avi and Elayne

3 hours ago, Elder_Haman said:

I think there is a good faith interpretation of the books that sees their relationship as having romantic undertones.

It's not like you want to have sex with your siblings if you say to them:"I love you." There are different types of love and their was as sisterly as can get. But anyway, Rafe said he'll make straight character gay and he did. It wasn't in jest

On 5/29/2025 at 6:31 PM, Elder_Haman said:

It was obviously in jest

 

[Samt]

2 hours ago, Elder_Haman said:

Incest angle? I legitimately have no idea what you're talking about.

It’s pretty clear that RJ wrote the relationship between Elayne and Aviendha as sisters, even going so far as to have a ceremony where they are ceremonially reborn from a common mother.  If you think that he also intended for their relationship to be romantic, that’s a pretty clear incest angle.

[Elder_Haman]

32 minutes ago, Samt said:

It’s pretty clear that RJ wrote the relationship between Elayne and Aviendha as sisters, even going so far as to have a ceremony where they are ceremonially reborn from a common mother.  If you think that he also intended for their relationship to be romantic, that’s a pretty clear incest angle.

I feel silly belaboring this point because ultimately, I agree with your interpretation.  But the question isn't about what RJ intended. It's about whether someone reading the books could, in good faith, read that relationship as romantic.

 

I submit to you that the existence of a sizeable number of fans have interpreted the Avi/Elayne relationship as romantic dating back to well back before the show existed is proof positive that people can interpret the relationship as romantic in good faith.

 

So while I agree with your interpretation of the text, when dealing with something subjective like this I am not going to push my interpretation as the one and only true answer. Bottom line: I don't think that making Elayne and Avi bi was a terrible change, I don't think it was completely unsupported by the text, and I definitely don't think that it was Rafe trying to punish fans by making a character gay.

 

There was another factor involved in the decision was well, which is the "ickiness" factor involving polygamy. I'm not sure why anyone would worry about it, given the fairly libertine sensibilities around sex in general, but there's no denying that "dude with a harem" is looked at differently than "three people in a polycule."

Edited May 30 by Elder_Haman

[Samt]

2 minutes ago, Elder_Haman said:

I feel silly belaboring this point because ultimately, I agree with your interpretation.  But the question isn't about what RJ intended. It's about whether someone reading the books good, in good faith, read that relationship as romantic.

 

I submit to you that the existence of a sizeable number of fans have interpreted the Avi/Elayne relationship as romantic dating back to well back before the show existed is proof positive that people can interpret the relationship as romantic in good faith.

 

So while I agree with your interpretation of the text, when dealing with something subjective like this I am not going to push my interpretation as the one and only true answer. Bottom line: I don't think that making Elayne and Avi bi was a terrible change, I don't think it was completely unsupported by the text, and I definitely don't think that it was Rafe trying to punish fans by making a character gay.

 

There was another factor involved in the decision was well, which is the "ickiness" factor involving polygamy. I'm not sure why anyone would worry about it, given the fairly libertine sensibilities around sex in general, but there's no denying that "dude with a harem" is looked at differently than "three people in a polycule."

There is no practical objective way to really quantify who prevalent an idea is among readers, so you’re mostly just hand waving to say that if some people have that interpretation then it must be reasonable without support.  That’s illogical.  
 

Any attempt to argue that Aviendha and Elayne had a sexual relationship in the book must make the claim that either their relates not written as a sibling relationship or that it was intended as an incestuous relationship.  One of those assertions is deviant and the other lacks logic.

[Elder_Haman]

7 minutes ago, Samt said:

you’re mostly just hand waving to say that if some people have that interpretation then it must be reasonable without support.

I'm actually not. I am just not prepared to say that my own interpretation of the text is the only reasonable interpretation of the text.

 

You go on and on about them being sisters. But they weren't written to start out as sisters. They became sisters via a ceremony that also resembles a wedding in many ways. The ceremony occurs inside a culture that is entirely alien from our own and conceptualizes a 'sister' as something entirely different from being born from the same mother. 

 

There's no reason to climb aboard some high horse and pretend I have a monopoly on the only reasonable way to interpret the text. Books say different things to different people. It's not my place to tell someone who sees different things as important that they are wrong.

 

ADDED:

Also, "there's no way to quantify how much of this thing that exists really exists" isn't much of an argument. What you're essentially saying is that no one may, in good faith, read that relationship as romantic. The evidence clearly shows that many people ready that relationship as romantic. Are they all acting in bad faith?

Edited May 30 by Elder_Haman

[WoTwasThat]

51 minutes ago, Elder_Haman said:

Also, "there's no way to quantify how much of this thing that exists really exists" isn't much of an argument. What you're essentially saying is that no one may, in good faith, read that relationship as romantic. The evidence clearly shows that many people ready that relationship as romantic. Are they all acting in bad faith?

 

Bad faith? I dunno. How about "agenda driven"? Or maybe just "confirmation bias"? It's human nature to interpret things in ways that conform to your own lifestyle and preferences. Hell, just look at all the people arguing that Abe Lincoln or [insert other historical figure without any real proof] was gay. I don't know what percentage of the fanbase this is, but I'd just settle on "sizeable" and, more importantly, it unfortunately included Rafe.

Edited May 30 by WoTwasThat

[Elder_Haman]

21 minutes ago, WoTwasThat said:

How about "agenda driven"?

So people who read the books when they came out and saw this as a romantic relationship were "agenda driven"?

 

21 minutes ago, WoTwasThat said:

It's human nature to interpret things in ways that conform to your own lifestyle and preferences.

YES!!

And that means that literature is open to a wide range of interpretations. Which is the only thing I'm arguing here. It's like banging my head into a wall.

[Samt]

Having two sisters bang is incest.  It’s not complicated.  Some opinions are wrong and some readings require you to just pretend that the words on page don’t mean what they usually mean.  Like arguing that a sister ceremony is not really about “sisters.”  If RJ wanted them to get married, there is no conceivable reason to use the word “sisters” if he didn’t want to imply incest.
 

People also think that the earth is flat and that vaccines cause autism.  If you just want to say that some people believe stuff and therefore nobody knows anything and words don’t mean anything in particular and reality is subjective, then I don’t know why you think reading or writing is meaningful.

[LTL]

Given that I've posted a couple of times a little off topic, I'd also like to give my main feelings on the cancellation. I think it's a real shame given the direction things were going. Season 3 was a genuinely good season of television and if it had been that quality from the start, I imagine we'd be in a very different situation. Circumstances also played a part. Had the timetable been sped up by a couple of years, we'd probably be getting a season 4, even given the exact same seasons 1-3, so that's unfortunate.

 

Rather than be annoyed at Rafe, or anyone else though, my main feeling towards everyone involved with the show is gratitude. It seems clear to me that Rafe put his heart and soul into doing the best he could with the show, regardless of whether I agree with all the choices he made. I always thought that WoT would be far too hard to turn into a good tv show to ever see it happen, yet they dealt with some aspects of it better than I could have imagined (some blunders also, don't get me wrong). There are characters, cultures, scenes and moments that I never thought I'd see on screen, that I'm super happy to have been able to see brought to life.

 

There are also a huge number of other people who did a great job on the show, both actors and behind the scenes. Some no doubt cared more than others, but particularly seeing interviews with many of the actors, it's clear that they took the job of representing their character very seriously. I loved the cast and some of the performances were brilliant, it's a real shame for them that they don't get to continue the show. Some of Zoe's work in season 1, Madeleine as a damane and Josha in Rhuidean jump out immediately as outstanding but so many cast members did the show and the books proud with their portrayal.

 

Not that they'll read this, but to everyone who gave it their all, I wish them all the best in their future careers and I'll be rooting for them to succeed in whatever they do next.

[Elder_Haman]

1 hour ago, Samt said:

Having two sisters bang is incest.

They aren't sisters. So it's not incest.

Are all "first sisters" actual sisters?

[SinisterDeath]

1 hour ago, Samt said:

Having two sisters bang is incest.  It’s not complicated.  Some opinions are wrong and some readings require you to just pretend that the words on page don’t mean what they usually mean.  Like arguing that a sister ceremony is not really about “sisters.”  If RJ wanted them to get married, there is no conceivable reason to use the word “sisters” if he didn’t want to imply incest.

Someone missed the Hubs yearly report since 2016.

[king of nowhere]

4 hours ago, WoTwasThat said:

 

This is a little controversial for sure, but I always thought "ta'varen" was one of the dumbest concepts in the books and I would have been happy if they had dropped it from the show altogether. Basically, it just stands for "massive plot convenience."

and i loved the concept instead.

look, all stories have massive plot convenience. things happen at just the right time, characters are in just the right place.

like, take star wars. there's a whole galaxy, and the droids carrying the schematics of the death star take an escape pod and just happen to fall close to the secret son of darth vader. what are the odds? are they even smaller than the odds that all the stormtroopers that took shots at the protagonists never managed to hit once, not even by accident?

take lord of the rings. the ring is lost for 3000 years. then gandalf and sauron locate it at the same time. gandalf wonders if bilbo has the one ring, leaves to do research, stays away for 17 years, comes to warn frodo. meanwhile, sauron tracks gollum, tortures the information out of him, follows the hints to the shire. and after those 17 years (or 50+ years if we count from when bilbo took the ring, or 3000 years if we count from when the ring was first lost) gandalf manages to reach the shire just a few hours before the nazgul. he could have arrived there one month earlier, and made the trip in safety. or he may have arrived one week later, finding frodo already dead.

 

ta'veren is perfect to have all those kind of contrived coincidences that always happen, and have them being justified. characters are aware of this plot armor and plan around it. i loved the concept, a lot more than the whole reincarnation thing

 

which incidentally shows once more that adapting wot is so hard. what to you is a minor thing that you didn't care much for, for others it's the main selling point of the saga.

[immrtal1]

Once again, we see this fact occur… Go woke and go broke! 
I’m sad to see it go, but it took me a while to get into it. I just kept telling my mind that this was just another era of the wheel spinning and not the era I knew in the book.😂