Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY

Without meaning to be insensitive - in regards to AMOL


dlan4327

Recommended Posts

The comments about Terry Goodkind got me to thinking about the first time I read The Eye of the World, and Wizards First Rule. 

 

I actually bought both of them on the same day.  I was looking for something new to read in 2005, and I went to Barnes and Nobles looking for a couple of good books to get started on.  I remember thinking that I had seen both The Eye and Wizards FR many times but for some reason I never bothered trying to read them.  So I took a chance and bought both of them.  I then started tEotW first and could not put it down, and I read all the way through Crossroads in like a week and a half.  I completely forgot about WFR until after KoD came out, and I had read throught WoT like 3 times already.  Then I read WFR and the whole of that series as well.

 

To be honest I really enjoy both series, but I have noticed many similarities.  The biggest being the adam/ rada'han, and Rand being the Car a carn to the Aiel, and Richard being the Caharin to the Baka Man Mana.  But I think the tone of the books are so different it is hard to compare them past the direct similarities.  SoT is more dark and WoT is a more masterful story.  Both gripping reads though in my book.

 

I honestly hope that Harriet and Tor are the ones to finish AMOL, and that they don't hand it to a another author.  The work was RJs alone, and it should stay in the hands of those he was closest too, and shared his ideas with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 178
  • Created
  • Last Reply
The team's postseason ERA was 5.333 ... thats not very good.

 

-True, but that's due mostly to inexperianced pitching that had never reached post season play before. (aka Marmel who just absolutely blew it). And we now have Kerry Wood back whose acually been healthy for an astonishing 4 months!! With him being able to move back up into the starting rotation our pitching should be improved, along with the future call up of one of our Triple A pitchers (The guy got put into the Line-up at the last possible instant, Idon't even remember his name, but he was good lol).

 

You could have a point there ... one that I'd even buy ... after I saw a change.  After all, if he hates being on the Yankees so much, why did he produce during the entire regular season?  Does he only start hating them in the playoffs?   

 

His team didn't change in October.  But the pressure to produce did.  Do you really think that will be different wherever he goes?

 

As a Red Sox fan, I understand the pain of not winning for a long, long time.  But sinking 300 million into A-Rod isn't the answer for the Cubs, or for any other team.  For the price tag he'll demand, the Cubs could get an almost equivalent bat and a valid #2 starter.

 

- I believe he did indeed start hating them in the playoffs. He produced during the regular season because he has planned to opt out of his contract for quite a while. He did well in order to boost his salery for whatever team he plays for next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And we now have Kerry Wood back whose acually been healthy for an astonishing 4 months!! With him being able to move back up into the starting rotation our pitching should be improved, along with the future call up of one of our Triple A pitchers (The guy got put into the Line-up at the last possible instant, Idon't even remember his name, but he was good lol).

 

OK.  You can hope.

 

I believe he did indeed start hating them in the playoffs. He produced during the regular season because he has planned to opt out of his contract for quite a while. He did well in order to boost his salery for whatever team he plays for next season.

 

Well, as I said, you're welcome to him.  We don't really want a guy who would produce in the regular season to boost his future contract, then bomb in the playoffs because he knew he was leaving ...

 

I'd much rather the Red Sox re-sign Mike Lowell than go after A-Rod anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think maybe Robyn Hobb could pull it off.  If any of you haven't read the Farseer Trilogy you should.  She is an excellent writer and a top notch story teller.  He character development is beyond anything I have read. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a character from a small village that gets dragged into a big fight that he wants nothing to do with, but ends up being the hero. Seriously, think about it.  Do you really think Robert Jordan was the first one to ever come up with that plotline?

 

Either you haven't read the SoT series...or you are just ignorant of the truth of the issue.

 

The issue is not what you were referring to (which is called the Monomyth by the way).

 

The issue is the similarity in the smaller things.

 

Look at Luckers post for more info.

 

But, to be brief, there are these, at least:

 

The rada'han - a thing very, very similar to an a'dam. It's a collar used to hold a wizard(channeler)

 

The Sisters of the Light - an organization similar to the Aes Sedai, particularly almost exactly like the Red Ajah.

 

The Sisters of the Dark - a lot like the Black Ajah

 

Blood of the Fold - similar to the Hand of the Light of the Children

 

And, if you haven't read them, trust me when I say that it is just too clearly similar in very precise aspects to be coincidence.

 

But, I wouldn't say that the books shouldn't be read. Books 1 through 4 were pretty good, though I haven't read the rest.

 

And also, I think, far more of a problem than the similarity, is how he uses his books as a platform for his philosophy.

 

This has irked me a bit. Some of his wizard rules, and their explanation, such as the first, really both me:

 

"People are stupid; given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything. Because people are stupid, they will believe a lie because they want to believe it's true, or because they are afraid it might be true. People’s heads are full of knowledge, facts, and beliefs, and most of it is false, yet they think it all true. People are stupid; they can only rarely tell the difference between a lie and the truth, and yet they are confident they can, and so are all the easier to fool."

 

 

He clearly is very full of himself. I can feel it through the text.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry if I'm interrupting but after starting this thread, and not coming back to it for a long time or very frequently, I am somewhat bemused to find that it seems to have evolved a life of it's own drifting between the original topic, I think it was Goodkind, and a seemingly heated debate about baseball. I'm a football addict from Australia, by football I mean what Americans call soccer, so I know next to nothing about baseball. If anyone's interested could they explain all the technical stuff. What's an ERA? Also why is an ERA of 5.333 bad? Heck, how do you even get a statistic like 5.333? You just don't get stats like that in football. ??? Oh, BTW I do sympathise with one thing though. Player salaries. I mean 300 Million for one guy? Who is this A-Rod guy? There's a premier league center back(defender) called John Terry who earns somewhere between ₤130000 to ₤150000 (US$300000) PER WEEK. NOT INCLUDING personal sponsorship and endorsements. It's hard to understand what they could need that much for.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People who feel that Goodkind has ripped off Jordan are basically full of themselves, and without warrant. They take very simple ideas that have been used hundreds of times before either authors incorporated them into their books as proofs of plagiarism. This is just silly. Regardless of whether or not you appreciate Goodkind's philosophy, you should recognize that his over-emphasis on it alone separates him from Jordan. And let us take a look at the magic itself. Would one really feel that additive/subtractive magic is akin to a male/female form of magic? Only if you denounce Goodkind's rather simple philosophies. Both series grew rather tiresome near their near ends, but both did so for different reasons. Goodkind tried to fit too much preaching in, which was more reminiscent of the Mormon Orson Scott Card than Jordan...while Jordan seemed to get lost in the subtleties of his world and forgot to advance the plot. Jordan's universe was complex enough to allow infinite detail, to the point where the World of Time series could have filled an equally infinite number of volumes. Maybe he had too many ideas that he was trying to fit into one story, or perhaps he didn't quite know how to finish it properly, but the series became so wrapped up in social intrigue that the pace (when compared to earlier books) slowed down to almost real-time. To finish the series in one book (book 12) will require such a huge step-up in pace as to be completely devoid of anything but action sequences. Even with 1500 pages, there is so much conflict to resolve that there seems to be little room for the substance he drowned the later half of the series with. I do look forward to the conclusion of the series though; it should turn out to be revelation upon revelation in an orgy of cliff-hangers finally climaxed. I'm also looking forward to Goodkind's work which is coming out much definitely sooner, although his philosophy is rather mediocre. The last book seemed to indicate a move back towards the mystery of the earlier novels instead of the righteousness of the later novels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I forgot to mention this, but I think Gene Wolfe would be a good candidate for completing the series. Has anyone read his tetralogy consisting of Shadow & Claw (Shadow of the Torturer, Claw of the Conciliator), and Sword & Citadel (Sword of the Lictor, Citadel of the Autarch)? It's fantastic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They take very simple ideas that have been used hundreds of times before either authors incorporated them into their books as proofs of plagiarism.

 

Must we again go through this?

 

Rada'han = a'dam

 

They are both bracelet/necklaces which keep either a wizard or a channeler from their ability. Can you tell me how often this "very simple idea" is included in other peoples' works?

 

To quote myself:

The Sisters of the Light - an organization similar to the Aes Sedai, particularly almost exactly like the Red Ajah.

 

The Sisters of the Dark - a lot like the Black Ajah

 

Blood of the Fold - similar to the Hand of the Light of the Children

 

What you fail to realize is that (and that was just a brief list of things from off the top of my head) even accepting this all as coincidence, in that most of these ideas are included in other authors' works, the possibilities of a book series containing all of these similarities with another book series without the author having ever read the series he bummed ideas from (and he claims not to have read them) is very, very slim.

 

You might find a series here and there that has a group of channeling women who disdain men who can do the same here and there, and you might find an organization that is hidden within an organization and covertly tries to undermine the Light, or you might find a group of people who disdain magical use because they cannot understand/utilize it and proclaim it sacrilege, but how often will you find a series that uses all of these things???

 

These are not common ideas. This is not monomyth-type stuff. It's not your typical sword and sorcery-type books. These are high fantasy. And rarely ever will you find high fantasy series to have that many similarities.

 

There might be a 1/6 odd that you roll a "1" with a die. But there is a 1/36 chance that you roll snake-eyes (with 2 dice).

 

So, with more variables, it becomes increasingly unlikely. I'll see if I can find a site which explains the amount of similarity better.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh yes, it is very hard to believe that one would consider, in a world of magic, a device which allowed one to control another's magic.  Your point is absurd. The fact that the device is a leash just makes it even more absurd. People collar animals to control/possess them. Taking this one step further and applying it to their magic is hardly a revolutionary idea. A similar idea was used for telepaths in Asimov's The Mule. Other than the manipulation device, you list a good (light) side and a bad (dark) side. Did Jordan steal this idea from Lucas? Or has light and dark existed for so long that nobody even knows who coined this simple idea?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, it is not just a device used to control anothers magic. It is a collar/leash-and-collar. Secondly, the person who is collared experiences very simliar pain when trying to use magic.

 

Thirdly, I did not list a good side and a bad side. Did actually read my post, or did you just skim it?

 

I listed Sisters of the Light as being a (here, I'll list the different variables) 1) female organization of 2)exclusively female 3)magic users who 4)want to collar 5)male 6)magic users.

 

That's six different variables right there. Red ajah, hello???

 

 

Then, I listed a 1) group of magic users 2)who exist as a covert organization within 3)another organization whose purpose is 4)the opposite of the real organization's.

 

Very incredibily specific, ignoramus. (Clearly you are either that, being as how all but 2 people agree with my stance, or you are a visionary, which I doubt, since I have refuted your arguments without using the straw man fallacy, as you so clearly did to me.)

 

Then, I went on to say that even if these were widely used ideas, it would be exponentially more unlikely to find a number of them used by the same author. I used the dice explanation. Read my quote above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, it is not just a device used to control anothers magic. It is a collar/leash-and-collar. Secondly, the person who is collared experiences very simliar pain when trying to use magic.

 

 

 

I listed Sisters of the Light as being a (here, I'll list the different variables) 1) female organization of 2)exclusively female 3)magic users who 4)want to collar 5)male 6)magic users.

 

 

 

 

Then, I listed a 1) group of magic users 2)who exist as a covert organization within 3)another organization whose purpose is 4)the opposite of the real organization's.

 

Very incredibily specific, ignoramus.

 

Then, I went on to say that even if these were widely used ideas, it would be exponentially more unlikely to find a number of them used by the same author. I used the dice explanation. Read my quote above.

 

WoT is my favorite series, and SoT is pretty good. BUT this argument is terrible, if it was plagiarism, dont you think someone would be filing a lawsuit by now? 

 

second, all fantasy authors use other people's ideas.  There are also many similarities between LotR and WoT, but who is crying foul about that?  The fellowship is much like the fellowship in EotW.  The Dark Lord Sauron is RJ's Dark One.  Sauron creates a ring to always have dominion over man, much like the DO tainted saidin to always hold sway over them.  Aragorn is a long lost king of a dead land, just like Lan.  Aragorn gets a sword from his ancestors, just like Lan's sword from his ancestors.  Sarumon is a forsaken, he gave up the light for power and immortality.  The orcs in LotR seem to resemble trollocs.  The bad ass orcs in LotR can be considered myrdraal.  boromir is tempted and overpowered by the desire for the ring, mat is obsessed with his dagger in EotW. The White City in LotR sounds a lot like Tar Valon.  there are tons of similarities.  so stop beating the dead horse.   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BUT this argument is terrible, if it was plagiarism, dont you think someone would be filing a lawsuit by now? 

 

I never said it was plagiarism. In fact, all I've done is point out parallels and similarites.

 

But it isn't plagiarism, simply because the story has a different plot and a different cast of characters.

 

It is just that some of the groups of people and some of the concepts (in fact, a lot more than I can come up with since I read the books a while ago) are very extremely similar.

 

Second, like I said, it is the accumulation of similarites.

 

Thirdly, many of those comparisons to LotR require quite a stretch of the imagination. A rada'han, however, a collar used to chain a wizard, as compared to an a'dam, a collar and leash used to chain a channeler. There are many other, almost exact similarites.

 

Your lord of the rings similarites however... The White City sounds like Tar Valon??? What, because it is white, and at the time the characters first see it, it is the most marvelous thing they've ever seen and therefore the description is filled with superlative?? Because a seven-tiered city carved into the face of a mountain is not much like a city on an island in the midst of a river with harbors on the north and south side.

 

Aragorn's inheritance of his sword was part of the story, and important to the plot; Lan's sword was there since the beginning, not important to the plot, and therefore irrelevant and only noticed by you because you were searching for some way to refute me.

 

Sauron created a ring to have dominion over man. Right. But the DO did not taint saidin as a way to hold sway over the population. No, it was a backlash from the sealing of the bore, the DO's counterstroke. He did it to gain vengeance (of sorts) on male channelers for the sealing of the bore.

 

The orcs in LotR resemble Trollocs. No, they don't, if you read the descriptions. Orcs are of human shape, but smaller than Men, ugly, and filthy. In a private letter, Tolkien describes them as "squat, broad, flat-nosed, sallow-skinned, with wide mouths and slant eyes". Trollocs have multiple animal features, such as beaks, hooves, horns, paws, snouts, antlers, etc.

 

The Uruk-hai are Myrdraal. Again, only in the loosest sense, since they can control normal orcs and Myrdraal control Trollocs. But how similar is a huge, brutish orc to a man with no eyes whose cloak doesn't blow in the wind and whose "stare" is death?

 

Boromir is tempted by his desire for the ring and Mat is obsessed with the dagger. Wow, if anything, I thought you would compare Frodo and Mat. Boromir never had the ring to finger and touch and hold and stare at. He only had his desire. And he eventually had to start to die before he repented (willingly). Mat's condition was more of controllable thing, and he was healed. Boromir was not a true main character, and he did not survive.

 

The fellowship is much like the fellowship. Because they are a group of people on a journey? There aren't halflings, elves, or dwarves in the Wheel of Time "fellowship," and unlike with Frodo and Co, they certainly don't know where they are really going. In fact, if I remember right, they were headed to Tar Valon, not to take Rand to Shayol Ghul to destroy the DO.

 

The DO is the antithesis of the Creator and is imprisoned in the pattern and is as powerful as it gets. Sauron was just a lesser spirit who got corrupted by his mentor.

 

And thanks for calling my argument terrible. If you want to disagree, disagree, and say so, but calling my argument terrible is getting nowhere with me or anyone else or adding any credibility to what followed.

 

Also, it obviously isn't a dead horse if we can still say stuff we haven't already said.

 

PS. Welcome to the Forums. Hope you enjoy your stay. I can't help wondering if you were a lurker and my post is what motivated you to come out of hiding and say something. Sorry if this post sounds rude. It isn't intended that way, and in fact, don't think I am offended by you calling my argument terrible. All I was saying is that statements like that get you nowhere. If nothing else, you should say "This argument doesn't hold up." Okay? Thanks.

 

BTW, it is the degree of similarity. I'd suggest that the comparisons you made are only valid for a cursory reader, but for a reader who carefully reads and notices every detail, things like that do seem more dissimilar. A rada'han is an a'dam by any other name. That's just one example, and it may seem like I don't have many examples, and truth be told, I don't, but that is because I haven't read the books in a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no i am not a lurker, the thread was interesting to me because SoT was mentioned because that is the series i am reading right now while waiting for WoT.  and when i said terrible, i wasnt particularly targeting your post, i meant it as its an argument that likely will not come to any compromise.  the same argument about star wars and star trek i guess, or playstation versus xbox.

 

the rada'han is used to control a wizard in order for the magic not to kill him in the early stages of becoming a wizard.  it is a collar that offers protection, plus as an ability to teach (since in SoT, wizards are rare and sorceresses arent.)  the a'dam is a leash, and it is used not for the caster's own good, but for the subjugation of an "animal."  The rada'han is used to teach, the a'dam is used to control.  A sword and axe are both weapons with a sharp blade but they have distinct fighting styles, much how a rada'han is a collar and a'dam a leash.   

 

The White City and the White Tower.  Of course they are the same.  A collar is much like a leash is it not?

 

Aragorn's sword is a symbol of his heritage, Lan's sword is the exact same thing.  and sarumon is way too like a forsaken.  fallen hero hell bent on power?

 

The DO's tainting of saidin and the ring are similiar as in their corrupting nature.  No matter how hard one tries, a human with the ring will do wrong, and a male tainted channeler will go mad.

 

The orcs may not resemble trollocs physically but they do in principle.  trollocs used to be humans, but they were twisted and bred by aginor.  the Uruk-hai used to be elves.  thats the connection and similiarity.  the Uruk-hai are the elite orcs, much like the myrdraal are the elite trollocs.  (the myrdraal and trollocs were formed the same way, the myrdraal are simply the rare catch in the breeding process.)  the myrdraal could even resemble the wraiths, atleast with the all black garb.  Raken could be their flying beasts.

 

Maybe a better example with the ring would be gollum and padan fain.  as in the padan fain when he is trying to get the dagger back.  he wants it back because the dagger is part of him, which is extremely close to gollum's need for the ring because it sustains him.  padan fain is much different when separated from the dagger, he has a hunger for it, just like gollum.

 

the fellowship argument is also valid imo.  emond's field is just like the shire.  the hobbits are just like the ignorant and naive characters of rand, mat, and perrin.

 

i think RJ and TG picked female societies (AS and sisters of the light) because women in some fantasy books are usually considered to be motherly, wise, and caring.  and reading fantasy is i believe a male majority?  it wouldnt make sense imo to have AS all male or sisters of the light as males.  it doesn't sound right to me.  Sisters of the dark are very similiar to the black ajah.  i dont think there is any way around that because good guys always have the evil secret sects.  just look at the sith in star wars.  they are jedi's, but closet sith at the same time.  since both groups are women, i can see how they are very close together.

 

WoT is much better than SoT, and i see many similiarities between the two.  and of course WoT is better.  it is much more epic, while SoT is more personal.  im just saying that the WoT series is very guilty of using the same similarities that SoT uses on the WoT.  we can both argue how one is and one isnt, but in truth they are. 

 

       

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read the Sword of Truth series, and from reading this thread, I don't intend to, however I would like to point out that the similarities between WoT and SoT which Ealdur Tinuviel (and noone has really contested) are far more similar similarities than the ones between WoT and LotR that you listed, Drewcifer.

 

Saruman was already imortal, he didn't trade anything for anything, he was stupid enough to look into his palantir and be corrupted by Sauron, in a similar way to Denethor, although Denethor it seems had a stronger will / wasn't swayed by Sauron.

 

If you are gonna compare Myrdraal to anything, its gotta be to the Nazgul, and even then the comparison doesn't stretch far beyond "they wear black"

 

Aragon is not the "lost king of a dead land" (your words), you'll notice Minas Tirith still standing when everyone arrives, but I will concede that I can see the parallel, however "lost king blah blah blah" is a big fat fantasy cliche and as such can be discounted.

 

I just can't see the taint = ring thing, they are totally different.

 

The white city (I assume you mean Minas Tirith) is not the white tower, other cities f'rinstance Ebu Dar are also described as being very White, are there lil' Minas Tirith's growing everywhere? Also the white tower is a tower, not a big city-fortress, besides I always see Minas Tirith as more grey than white and shiney, but that's just me.

 

Aragon's sword? oh gosh, a sword got passed down from father to son, is the sword Rand recieved from Tam also Aragon's sword?

 

You are factually wrong - the orcs used to be elves, the Uruk-Hai are the result of Saruman breeding humans and orcs afaik.

 

RJ has said on that the similarities between LotR and the first bit of Eye of the World are deliberate.

 

Idunno if you had any more points, but I'm done, if you want some better similarities between LotR and WoT I could list a few much more similar similarities, but I really don't feel like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

drewcifer84 &  animus,

 

The similarities between WoT and SoT or even LotR are in no way plagiarism.  The stories are way too different and I congradulate both authors for their abilities.

 

What irks most people around here is that while Jordan freely admits reading and both conciously and unconciously incorporating some of those elements in his writing.  Goodkind swears adamantly that he has never even read WoT much less conciously and unconciously incorporating some of those elements in his writing.

 

Yeah right!  ::) :P

 

Sorry Charlie but there are jusy too many direct take offs to be denied.  ET mentioned a very few but the list is HUGE and undeniable if he wants to maintain any credibility.

 

That said I think he took elements from WoT and created a very interesting and unique story that unlike some others, I have enjoyed.  It is a mostly interesting tale and to some extent his infusion of his philisophy into the mix is mostly OK.  But truth be told I think that he has gone a little too overboard in that realm and also in the repeditive plot area.  Come on Richard and Kalan captured AGAIN!!

 

I will be glad to read the last WSoT book and be done.    SoT for me is a One Time Read series, where WoT and ASoIaF and one other, I have read too many times to count.  They are KEEPERS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I much prefer WoT to SoT however I think the Mord'Sith would be an excellent addition to the story. In my version, Mord'Sith-like characters would be 'bred' to kill Myrrdraal, their part in any battle to hunt out and kill the soulless, thus reducing the numbers of Trollocs etc (when the M dies, so do the trollocs linked to it). They would be able to channel but will only use the Power as a last resort, preferring to fight their enemies with weapons which can be seen.

 

Oh dear i'm revealing myself for the geek that i am!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The similarities between WoT and SoT or even LotR are in no way plagiarism.  The stories are way too different and I congradulate both authors for their abilities.

 

What irks most people around here is that while Jordan freely admits reading and both conciously and unconciously incorporating some of those elements in his writing.   Goodkind swears adamantly that he has never even read WoT much less conciously and unconciously incorporating some of those elements in his writing.

 

You hit the nail on the head right there.

 

As I've said, and continue to say, the degree of similarity strongly suggests that Goodkind read and used WoT ideas. Perhaps not consciously, but still it definitely has an effect on the story.

 

And I do think, at least up to book four, the books in SoT have been really good. I haven't read the others, and maybe I will get to them eventually.

 

But the influence of Jordan on Goodkind is clearly evident (in my mind.)

 

the rada'han is used to control a wizard in order for the magic not to kill him in the early stages of becoming a wizard.  it is a collar that offers protection, plus as an ability to teach (since in SoT, wizards are rare and sorceresses arent.)  the a'dam is a leash, and it is used not for the caster's own good, but for the subjugation of an "animal."  The rada'han is used to teach, the a'dam is used to control.  A sword and axe are both weapons with a sharp blade but they have distinct fighting styles, much how a rada'han is a collar and a'dam a leash. 

 

A rada'han is used to control a wizard. An a'dam is used to control a channeler. A rada'han is a seamless metal collar. An a'dam is a seamless collar attached by a leash to a seamless bracelet. Rada'hans are used to block people from touching their Han, to give them pain, and to block them from making a move against their will. An a'dam is used to block people from touching the Source, to give them pain, and to block them from making a move against the owner's will.

 

Are you saying that if Jordan had a story about a guy with a magical axe that could spew purple flames 10 feet high in the sky and if Goodkind wrote a story about a guy with a magical sword that spewed dark blue flames 12 feet high in the air then it wouldn't seem kind of funny that they both wrote about that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Are you saying that if Jordan had a story about a guy with a magical axe that could spew purple flames 10 feet high in the sky and if Goodkind wrote a story about a guy with a magical sword that spewed dark blue flames 12 feet high in the air then it wouldn't seem kind of funny that they both wrote about that?

 

like the sword of truth and the sword of shannara?  they both represent truth!  i agree that SoT uses ideas and concepts from WoT, theres no argument there.  and i still believe in those EotW LotR parallels, which RJ admitted to.  i think using other's ideas are in every form of entertainment.  some bands sound the same and have some of the same lyrics,  a bunch of movies are the same, video games are the same, and authors use the same ideas in books.  its been fun arguing.  i wasnt trying to be overly critical and i hope my tone was ok.  its kind of hard to interpret words on a forum.  ill be done with the SoT series soon.  is ASoIaF really good?  is it WoT good?  that's next on my list of books to read.       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

is ASoIaF really good?  is it WoT good?  that's next on my list of books to read.         

 

On MY scale of 1 to 10.

 

SoT = 7

 

WoT = 9.9          But is much lighter than SoT.

 

ASoIaF = 9.9        But much, much darker than SoT, and much more grounded in the realities of what war or any termoil does to a kingdom / people.

 

 

P.S.  Very few arthors get much over a nine in my ratings although there are several right around nine.

 

Most nines would get a re-read from time to time.  WoT and ASoIaF are in a rare group that gets many re-reads and they still NEVER disappoint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

    Did you ever consider that the similarities between the two series may not be because one author copied the other, but because both authors have taken their ideas from a third source, or more? Perhaps Jordan and Goodkind both read many of the same books, and thus it would not be too hard to believe they may come up with the same ideas. Especially considering all the "similarities" are not exactly breathtaking feats of creativity. Seriously, a collar and a leash to control magic is not a very surprising idea. If you think it is, you must not possess a nano-gram of creativity yourself. The collar and leash are an extremely popular symbol for slavery. They both simply made the obvious conclusion that in a world with magic, a collar could also be used to control magic. I reiterate this logic for the all-female society argument. Societies of all females, where only the females are allowed to perform certain tasks, is a widely used concept. Probably because such organizations actually exist. 

    Many of these so-called lending of ideas seem more like ideas from a plethora of popular fiction and philosophy books, applied to a world with magic. What would Goodkind have to lose by admitting he read WoT? Or rather, what reason would he have to lie? I see no elements in his book that obviously show him to be a liar on that count. Writers, being artists, are generally a very elitist type of people. They read and refrence obscure intellectual literature to show how good their taste is. Why would Goodkind choose to read a current, incredibly popular series if he was looking for some good ideas to incorporate into his book? He would probably avoid it simply because it was popular, plus his writing shows him at least intelligent enough to leech from less heard of sources. I find it more likely that he would ignore his competition, as he said he did, simply because he was reading other material that was not in the same vein as his own work. To reprhase that idea, why read high-fantasy if you are trying to write a high-fantasy series unlike the others? And if he disliked the man enough that he wouldn't admit to having read his books (in the case that he's lying) why would he steal his ideas? If I disliked someone enough that I wouldn't admit to reading their work, I definitely wouldn't use their ideas. And if I were trying to avoid the copycat accusation, I wouldn't claim to have not read the book unless indeed I hadn't, as that claim would seem outrageous to the people making the accusations. I would choose to site another source and say that I had reinterpreted this or that, even though it may appear I took the idea from him [Jordan].   

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

good points, with fantasy writing, there is only so much one can do.  in both series, WoT and SoT, magic is feared and hated which leads to things such as the collars found in both series.  with the fear of magic being major themes throughout both series, what else would be a practical tool for control?  every author would probably use some type of collar or leash.  you could cage them i guess, but that isn't practical.  in WoT, shielding is a popular tool but that isnt practical either since it requires constant vigil.  both series wouldnt be much of a series if the collars were replaced with cages.  something had to be developed in order to keep the stories fluid, which were the collars, which seem to be the only practical form of control. 

 

magic + fear of magic + control = some type of collar. 

 

i think most of us, if we were fantasy authors, would answer the same way.  thats why i didnt really think goodkind copied RJ.  its just logic to control or domesicate something that is feared with some kind of leash or collar.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst the idea of metallic collars and the like being used to isolate, control or defeat magic and magic-users, the simply realities of the specific nature of the two ideas--rada'han and a'dam--they are too obviously connected, even in the nature of their names.

 

The same goes for the others, the Sisters of the Light and Dark and the Aes Sedai and Black Ajah represent more than just the idea of sorceresses who have attained a high degree of socialized power, they way they act, speak and react is simply too similar not to see a line of connection between the two--i mean the overall serenity, the over stated belief in their own knowledge, their direct denial of the darker elements amongst them, the way they treat males with a similar ability.

 

Pebbles in the Pond and ta'veren? The description and reaction are clear. The nature of weaving the power, and wizards webs? The elements of the two--I don't care if Goodkind added 'ice' as an element, its still bluntly obviour'. The Blood of the Fold and the Whitecloaks? For that matter the Creator/Keeper devision.

 

Individually all of these are fairly common fantasy ideas, but it is in their specific layout within the story that the similarities become blunt, especially when added to the number of themes, objects and characters correlate between the two. Furthermore RJ isn't the only person Goodkind steals from, Ayn Rand suffered almost as heavily. It's simply too much to even remotely suggest that its just 'similar literary constructs within the genre of fantasy'.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...