Ogier and Ents

[RAND AL THOR]

I generally dislike linking ideas in any one story to another. However, there seem to be some interesting relations between Ents and Ogier which suggests that RJ may have been inspired into creating Ogier after reading about Ents in LOTR. They are both nature-related beings with an affection for trees/woods. This alone would not be enough. But, one particular word caught me. Hasty. Treebeard uses it so much that when Loial said the same word and called humans 'hasty' it immediately got me thinking back to LOTR.

Of course, the 'hasty' may be due to the extended lives of both Ogier and Ents. Due to their long lives, they may see human lives as a movie that is being fast-forwarded. But again, that too is a similarity.

 

Many new novels directly draw data from LOTR. I would not say that here. Remember that TEOTW came out over 15 years ago when LOTR was not widely recognized. Furthermore, the beginning of TEOTW is also very similar to certain events in LOTR, speciafically,

1)heroes leaving hometown to defend hometown

2)books open with some sort of party/festival

3)mydraal resemble nazgul though they diverge later. In EOTW mydraal were VERY similar to nazgul, but later in the series that changed as we came across the various weaknesses of myrdraal.

3)trollocs/orcs. I am going to be very honest here. the word 'trolloc' sounds a bit lame in my opinion. 'Troll' is a known word. and the added 'oc' is a little weird.

 

Before I receive a  head bashing from the other members, let me say (as an aspiring author) that all ideas come from somewhere. I am somebody who believes that cliche idea can still make a great story if it is written well. Of course, WOT has very few cliches (ahem apart from the main overall objective of farmer boy with hazy parentage becoming saviour of the world). It was very well done.

 

Anyway, this thread was started to discuss Ent/Ogier similarities.

 

 

[Lord Nik]

both get cross when you cut down a tree?

[RAND AL THOR]

LOL. Cross doesnt cover it. Treebeard waged a war !

[Lord Nik]

very true.... when the happens ogier arnt exactly looking for friends :P

[CUBAREY]

LOTR was not widely recognized.

 

Actually, while some young fantasy fans may not have been aware of LOTR prior to 15 years ago, it has long been the recognized standard by which everything else is judged. To say that any decent fantasy writer was aware of LOTR is like saying that we are aware that we need oxygen to live. The thought may not be uppermost in your conscousness at all times you you better believe we  are all aware of it.

 

As a matter of fact, RJ has been quoted as saying that the similarities in The Eye of Thee World to LOTR were intentional, to give the reader a comfortible way into the story.

 

Moreover, not only are the Ogier a bit like the ent, but so is the Greenman. Moreover, the evil moving trees that the heroes encounter when they enter the corrupted land at the end of TEOTW are the evil mirror images of the ENT.

 

Also Trollic in The WHeel of Time quite closely resemble Ogiers in LOTR.

[Guest The Thin Inn Keeper]

The Ents are, surely, closer to the Greenman, what with being living trees and all that?

 

Tolkein was a philologist (a guy who's interested in the roots of language), and was concerned with the lack of an English myth, in terms of epic writings like Gilgamesh. The belief in the Greenman goes back to old English (i.e. before the Viking and Germanic invasions) traditions.

 

It's also quiet clear that Tolkein was, to say the least, clearly inspired by LOTR.

 

LOTR is widely recognised, but maybe not by younger people. In fact, Tolkein was originally quite irritated by its popularity, as the hippies were one of the first groups to pick it up. He wanted it to be seen as a classic tale, an epic, rather than a story about guys with pointy ears and big feet. It wasn't until a few years that it was widely recognised as a great literary work.

 

[Elwinn Taron]

Cubarey, I think you meant to say Orcs. :-X  Which, incidentally, in THE HOBBIT are called goblins.

 

I read LoTR in Junior High--I graduated High School in 1970, if that gives you any idea how long it's been around.  I think it was published in the early 50's.

 

Since Ogiers have absolutely no say in who they marry, maybe they would LIKE to lose their wives? ::)

[CUBAREY]

I graduated High School in 1970, if that gives you any idea how long it's been around.  I think it was published in the early 50's.

 

I believe I read  somehere that LOTR was written in the 30's and early 40's but not published until late 40's (1948?).

 

Prior to LOTR you have to go back to the Chivelric novels of the late middle ages (the literary grandchildren of the Arthurian Legends) to find novels that dealt with Knights, magic, adventures,  etc., (and The publication of Don Quixote in 1608 basicly killed that genre of fiction). So Tolkien is definately the father of modern "fantasy". 

 

p.s. you're right on the Orcs, its been a while since the last time I read LOTR (sometime between The Two Towers and the Return of the King movies came out).

[Mr Ares]

I graduated High School in 1970, if that gives you any idea how long it's been around.  I think it was published in the early 50's.

 

I believe I read  somehere that LOTR was written in the 30's and early 40's but not published until late 40's (1948?).

Fellowship was published in 1954

[Thorum]

The idea was there before WW II, but the writing only started afterwards.

[RAND AL THOR]

As a matter of fact, RJ has been quoted as saying that the similarities in The Eye of Thee World to LOTR were intentional, to give the reader a comfortible way into the story.

 

I have come across this statement several times. Can someone please explain it further? I can't imagine why any author would say such a thing which makes very little sense. 'comfortable way into the story'??? Every author's world is unique. Why should he want to do that? RJ has his own skills. He did not need to start off TEOTW in a fashion similar to LOTR.

 

And I was a waddling babe 20 yrs ago so I was assuming that LOTR was not as popular as now- with reference to the dramatic boost in popularity with the release of the movies recently. It seems I was wrong however.

 

But I still can't believe why RJ would do that. ???

[JenLenaMom]

It's in fact b/c LOTR is was and is so widely read, and well done.  RJ acknowledge many times that he drew inspiration from Tolkein.  He knew that a lot of the events in the book would be so different from anything else written, I don't think he wanted to throw us for too many loops too fast.

 

 

[Paviel]

Sorry for writing in cliches, but this reminds me of "Nothing new under the sun" and "Standing on the shoulders of giants."

 

As I'm sure we all know, great writers don't write in a vacuum; inspiration has to come from somewhere, and more often than not it comes from other great writers.

 

Besides, how many of us read the Eye of the World before any other Wheel of Time books? If you can imagine reading, say, The Fires of Heaven first, I'm sure you'll agree that RJ was right...

[RAND AL THOR]

As I'm sure we all know, great writers don't write in a vacuum; inspiration has to come from somewhere, and more often than not it comes from other great writers.

 

Exactly. As an aspiring author, noone can agree with that better than myself.

 

But I do not understand the explanation RJ gave for starting TEOTW in that manner.

[Paviel]

I'm afraid we're not on the same page here. Since I've read all of the WoT books, his explanation makes perfect sense to me, and I don't really know how to explain it. As far as I'm concerned, to understand that the first book in the series was inspired by Tolkien is to understand WHY it was inspired by Tolkien.

 

Is it really RJ's explanation for why he wrote The Eye of the World the way he did that confused you, or is it the fact that he wrote The Eye of the World that way at all?

[CUBAREY]

But I still can't believe why RJ would do that. 

 

One of the problems with writing fantasy is that it often takes 100-150 pages for the reader to get comfortible with the "universe" of the story. By conscously incorporating elements similar to those found in LOTR into the beginning of Eye of the World RJ made it possible for a reader to be comfortible without knowing the details of the universe the story was set in.  Also RJ meant it as homage to the person he acknowledged to be the master of the genre.

[RAND AL THOR]

One of the problems with writing fantasy is that it often takes 100-150 pages for the reader to get comfortible with the "universe" of the story.

 

Perfectly true.

 

By conscously incorporating elements similar to those found in LOTR into the beginning of Eye of the World RJ made it possible for a reader to be comfortible without knowing the details of the universe the story was set in.

 

This is precisely what I consider strange. RJ's abilities are distinct. His world is unique. He could have started TEOTW in his own unique way without trying to mimic the beginning of LOTR. I have read many fantasy novels where it is initially difficult to grasp the world but it gets easier as you go along. WOT could have been done that way too.

 

One of the challenges in reading fantasy is understanding the world that the author has created. When RJ says: "to give the reader a comfortible way into the story" I think, why is everyone endorsing LOTR as master of fantasy? I mean I truly love the series but I can see some notable problems (mainly the slow pace of the first book). It is after all just another book. It is unfair to treat LOTR like the bible of fantasy and to root future fantasy books from that.

[Guest The Thin Inn Keeper]

This is precisely what I consider strange. RJ's abilities are distinct. His world is unique. He could have started TEOTW in his own unique way without trying to mimic the beginning of LOTR. I have read many fantasy novels where it is initially difficult to grasp the world but it gets easier as you go along. WOT could have been done that way too.

I agree, RJ wrote in a distinct way. However, if you're picking up the first book in a soon-to-be 13 book series, well, getting an idea of where you are is certainly useful. I mean, it could be seen as a way of giving the reader an idea if they'll enjoy the series. You don't immediately realise that Jordan was a great writer as soon as you open the TEOTW. A familiar setting gives you a nice, comfy reason for going on. And, if RJ wanted to tip his hat in Tolkein's direction, then fair play to him.

 

I think, why is everyone endorsing LOTR as master of fantasy? I mean I truly love the series but I can see some notable problems (mainly the slow pace of the first book). It is after all just another book. It is unfair to treat LOTR like the bible of fantasy and to root future fantasy books from that.

Because it was the first. Simple. It spawned the genre according to many people.

 

It's been hailed, rightly or wrongly, as the best example of modern fantasy, that's why it's its seen as the benchmark. So far it's also stood the test of time in terms of popularity. The majority of writers would hold Tolkein up as the godfather, so who are we to query their opinion?

 

And besides, all books/authors have their issues. I for one want to fall asleep when reading about Nynaeve, Elayne and Valan Lucas circus, and that takes up a lot of pages, but hey.

[Llewin]

I dont remember ever reading that RJ said he wanted to make the first book 'more comfortable'...regarding his Tolkien-esque beginnings... I do recall reading that he said he purposefully made the first *few* chapters feel like the beginning of LOTR specifically as an homage to the man and story he considered to be the foundations of modern fantasy writing...

 

Which, as has been mentioned in this thread, is pretty much a fore-gone conclusion in the world of writers today...

 

That said, the great majority of Tolkien's inspiration was the legendary stories of old English, almost all of his character types, creatures, and races have their foundations in the mythology of northern European antiquity...

 

Too often I see someone say that it disappoints them that such-and-such author is stealing ideas from some other work... I think the sign of a truly great author is not that they don't 'steal' or 'borrow' ideas, but that they can take ideas and patterns which have been around in some form for millenia and create a new and unique story from them with great success...

 

Tolkien did this,

 

RJ did this.

[RAND AL THOR]

If all fantasy writers start off their books in a LOTR fashion its going to get very boring indeed.

[Llewin]

Hmm... I addressed the tangent in this thread and not the thread itself... bad form there...

 

Ok so Ogier and Ents... some similarity? Yep... Other similarities?

Ogier always reminded me more of what most people think about elves than anything else, apart from their  height... Elves came from some of the various celtic/gaelic myths of the Fey peoples...

 

Trolloc = Troll

Trolloc tribal names:

Ahf'frait = Afrit

Al'ghol = Ghoul

Bhan'sheen = Banshee

Dha'vol = Devil

Dhai'mon = Demon

Dhjin'nen = Djin

Ghar'gael = Gargoyle

Ghob'hlin = Goblin

Gho'hlem = Golem

Ghraem'lan = Gremlin

Ko'bal = Kobold

Kno'mon = Gnome

 

Those are some of the most obvious....

 

Truth be told though, RJ did say in an interview (it has been a long time since I read it, and I do not have a link, sorry) that part of his concept for this story was to tell the 'what really happened' story for all of the mythologies of our modern world... so he has actually *purposefully* borrowed from many different places, and, in turn, purposefully mixed, matched, and amalgamated those legends and myths...

 

[CUBAREY]

This is precisely what I consider strange. RJ's abilities are distinct. His world is unique. He could have started TEOTW in his own unique way without trying to mimic the beginning of LOTR. I have read many fantasy novels where it is initially difficult to grasp the world but it gets easier as you go along. WOT could have been done that way too.

 

Fantasy readers are infamous for dropping a book that they don't almost immediately find interesting. RJ may have believed that by using certain LOTRisc elements early in TEOTW he could circumvent losing the finicky reader.

 

If all fantasy writers start off their books in a LOTR fashion its going to get very boring indeed.

 

Now they can start their books in Wheel of Time fashion. :D

[Razor]

Rand, perhaps that is why RJ has a very successful series adn you are still an aspiring author, LOL.

 

Seriously, RJ did it that way, he was the first to so it that way (heavily dopy form LOTR).  Hence it will not work again for anyone elwe as it will seem old.  But the first time, when done well is unique and interesting.  I really liked the beginning.  Didn't you?  If not, why did you keep reading?

[Guest The Thin Inn Keeper]

I dont remember ever reading that RJ said he wanted to make the first book 'more comfortable'...regarding his Tolkien-esque beginnings...

I'm under the impression that he was quite clearly quoted in a Q&A session, I'm sure someone here has it.

 

That said, the great majority of Tolkien's inspiration was the legendary stories of old English, almost all of his character types, creatures, and races have their foundations in the mythology of northern European antiquity...

I'd say that old English is one source. He picked and chose from all over the world. The problem is that the reader immediately recognises familiar stories, and misses  those that are not familiar with.

 

Ok so Ogier and Ents... some similarity? Yep... Other similarities?

I'm confused. How is an Ogier similar to an Ent? Surely an Ent is similar to the Greenman?

 

Trolloc = Troll

Trolloc tribal names:

Ahf'frait = Afrit

Al'ghol = Ghoul

Bhan'sheen = Banshee

Dha'vol = Devil

Dhai'mon = Demon

Dhjin'nen = Djin

Ghar'gael = Gargoyle

Ghob'hlin = Goblin

Gho'hlem = Golem

Ghraem'lan = Gremlin

Ko'bal = Kobold

Kno'mon = Gnome

 

Those are some of the most obvious....

 

That list and more are listed somewhere in here:

http://www.darkfriends.net/wheel/

 

There's also a long article on mythological elements in the WOT.

[RAND AL THOR]

Rand, perhaps that is why RJ has a very successful series adn you are still an aspiring author

 

Considering that my first book is not even completed yet, you may understand why I call myself an 'aspiring author.'

 

I really liked the beginning.  Didn't you?  If not, why did you keep reading?

 

I liked the beginning. After reading the whole series, I looked back and wondered why it started like LOTR and decided to discuss in this forum. I am not saying that the beginning was BAD- I am trying to say that I fail to see the reason for the book to begin in a fashion that mimics another work.

 

 

Fantasy readers are infamous for dropping a book that they don't almost immediately find interesting. RJ may have believed that by using certain LOTRisc elements early in TEOTW he could circumvent losing the finicky reader.

 

 

I strongly agree about the necessity for action early in the book. However, the tactic of mimicking the beginning atmosphere of another successful book, merely to keep the reader interested is a very poor writing technique. While RJ has his own talents, his writing style proves that he is a very talented writer and need not have employed such a method. So far the majority of the comments regarding this is that "RJ wished to make the reader comfortable." From my point of view, this really seems to be a very weak point. I can accept such a statement if it were made by a poor author but I fail to see why a distinguished author like RJ would say such a thing. The latter books clearly demonstrate his writing skill.

 

I particular liked the aspect of Book 3 where many main characters are scattered all over Randland and are brought to the Stone of Tear for the finale. I could sense the anticipation there. It was very well done.

 

Many people here may see my statements as a way of trying to disqualify and possibly insult RJ. I have no such notion whatsoever. I am hoping for further replies written in an unbiased and neutral manner.