'Wheel of Time' and 'Lord of Rings' parallels (potential spoilers)

[Arath Faringal]

In Paolini's defense, 13 and 9 are good numbers for evil organizations.  They sound official.  Really, if he'd had the 8, or the 16 forsworn everybody would have been like, wtf?  Get this loser out of here!

 

Dennis Leary talked about this with the 10 commandments.  Some numbers just work :P

 

Though I have to agree, a name just a little bit further away from 'forsaken' might have been nice.

[Fjong]

Everyone in the fantasy genre copies from each other, which is problery why people like it so much. Most of the worlds look alike, they have monsters which look alike (i mean orcs, elves, dwarves and so on). Some people just are more original and creative than others and succed to turn the book they write into something like noone have seen before (WoT is a good example of this). But then there are people like Paolini, who doesn't even bother by differing from the standard plot (good guy are chosen to beat the big bad meanie), so that everyone can see he didn't invent anything by himself.

On the sidenote: Ever played World of Warcraft? "The scarlet crusade" is kinda like "The Whitecloaks", don't get me wrong i absolutely love it when people get so blinded by what they think is right, that they see everyone who don't follow them as their enemy (in books mind).

[RAND AL THOR]

another gay quote from eragon "the 13 forsworn"

 

how gay i mean the guy should be sued for copyright infringement

 

He could've at least changed the freaking number!

[triadruid]

another gay quote...

 

how gay...

Not gay. Stupid, unoriginal, and boring. But sexual orientation has nothing to do with it (Aran'gar notwithstanding).

[Hybrid]

another gay quote...

 

how gay...

Not gay. Stupid, unoriginal, and boring. But sexual orientation has nothing to do with it (Aran'gar notwithstanding).

Vote no on Proposition 8a!  Allow quotes to marry other quotes of the same gender!

It could also be a very happy quote, but that is not the sense I got from the original post.  ;)

[Rasheta Ardashir]

I gotta say i'm rereading the books at the moment and I was surprised at how close to Fellowship of the Ring Eye of the world read. The characters are different clearly but they start out with seven compains going on a journey (yes I know in LOTR it was nine LOL) Even some of the names of places sounded very Tolkien Elvish when I read them. I can't remember them off the top of my head but they are there and if I have to i'll go grab my EoTW and find them again. LOL

 

I have to disagree with those who said the Ents are more like the Green Man then the Ogier. The Ogier always talk about humans being to hasty in there decisions and Lorial is always saying how he is to hasty even for an Ogier. They also can *if they remembered the songs* Tree sing etc.

 

I also hate to say this but I liked Eragon and Eldest. I'm looking forward to the third one. *shurg*

[lordofsoup]

On the sidenote: Ever played World of Warcraft? "The scarlet crusade" is kinda like "The Whitecloaks", don't get me wrong i absolutely love it when people get so blinded by what they think is right, that they see everyone who don't follow them as their enemy (in books mind).

 

true, but WOW is gay, u gotta play war #

 

@Rash Brinsignr is out (my little brother bread it and would not stop carrying it around for 2 weeks, he even slept with it.) 

[RAND AL THOR]

Even some of the names of places sounded very Tolkien Elvish when I read them.

 

At random,

 

Two Rivers

Whitebridge

Baerlon

Shadar Logoth

Caemlyn

Fal Dara

Andor

Tar Valon

 

 

Which of those sound LOTRish? If you mean the double worded names- those are common in fantasy.

 

The Old Tongue names for some cities were somewhat like LOTR, but certainly not these.

[sleddog116]

There were lots of parallels between EotW and LotR, especially Fellowship - As someone stated earlier, that was obviously intentional.  Even in the places they go:

 

Andor = Gondor

Two Rivers = The Shire

Emond's Field = Hobbiton

Baerlon = Bree

Aiel Wastes = Rohan

Rhuidian = Moria? (This one's not really as clear)

 

Would Caemlyn be Minas Tirith, or would Tar Valon?  I've always sort of thought of the AS as being sort of like the elves, but neither Rivendell nor Lothlórien are the seats of power that Tar Valon is.

 

That's another area that's kind of confusing; I see the Ogier as more like elves than ents, but the Aes Sedai are also sort of like elves.  (Moiraine always makes me think of Princess Zelda from Twilight Princess.)  Would the Amyrlin Seat equate to a female version of Elrond, or would she be more like Galadriel?

[RAND AL THOR]

omg. nothing more to say. omg

[cseresz]

Fantasy authors who build up their own worlds must have the talent of gripping the reader. There should not be ANY need to draw in the reader by creating similarities with other famous works. The confusing part is that RJ did have the talent, but chose to do this.

 

RJ:

 

I wanted to say, “This is the place you know, guys.  Now we’re going somewhere else.”  And then the Trolloc kicked in the farmhouse door.  But I didn’t take it to the point of trying to make the Two Rivers folk seem like Hobbits.  I mean, I love The Lord of the Rings and have read it at least a dozen times, but when you have too many Hobbits together, they can be so bloody cute that I need a stiff drink.

[cseresz]

There were lots of parallels between EotW and LotR ...

 

Sleddog116, what is your opinion of this?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._R._R._Tolkien%27s_influences

 

 

 

[sleddog116]

Oh, I like it.  I'm a huge fan of both series.  I think Jordan has done something no one else could do; he has more or less "Americanized" the epic high fantasy of Tolkien.  I'll be ecstatic when the EotW movie comes out (if they do it right and not like the Eragon books/movie)

 

And since this board seems to like talking about all the stuff Paolini copied, I'll point out one that everyone's missed (unless I just didn't see it); he oh so obviously ripped off of Anne McCaffrey's "Dragonriders of Pern" series.  I don't know how many have read these.

[RAND AL THOR]

 

 

RJ:

 

I wanted to say, “This is the place you know, guys.  Now we’re going somewhere else.”  And then the Trolloc kicked in the farmhouse door. 

 

Actually the similarity sort of begins here. Nazgul invasion of Shire etc...

[mb]

Several other Rand/Frodo parallels::

-loss of a body part caused by an enemy (Rand, hand by Semirhage; Frodo, finger by Gollum).

-Use of "Mr Underhill" as a nick name.

Another Rand/Aragorn parallel::

-Both connected to a number of prophecies.

Another Ogier/Ent parallel::

-Both love trees.

 

The raken could be another creature similar to the winged steeds; both are a one-person flying-transport.

 

Geography parallels

-River Erinin kind of similar to River Anduin; both go through most of the land, both go into a much larger body of water, both branch at that body of water.

-Mountains of Dhoom kind of similar to the Ered Mithrin (Grey Mountains); both are located near the north, both are near to a number of different rivers.

 

Those who have also read the Silmarillion may now mention any parallels between Wheel of time and it.

 

[lordofsoup]

I read the silmirilion, it is not really too much like it, except that there were multiple battles with the shadow before it is over throuwn.  But it would be interesting if Rand seals the Do's prison, but the forsaken are still around, kinda like Morgoth being caputured, and the Valar leave, but Sauron stays to torment the world.  Maybe Rand will leave the world, die or otherwise, but the destruction of sauron will be for another

[RAND AL THOR]

 

-Mountains of Dhoom kind of similar to the Ered Mithrin (Grey Mountains); both are located near the north, both are near to a number of different rivers.

 

 

Rivers usually begin at mountains.

[Mr Ares]

Perhaps LOTR was exceptionally inspiring to RJ too, and he started off with it as a 'guide.' However, his book developed by itself and turned into something that no one can ever call and LOTR rip off. In such a circumstance, he could have edited the beginning to make it more unique. That is, of course, assuming that LOTR provided the needed inspiration to get the EOTW going. There is no need to make the reader feel comfortable and all that. And good fantasy book is going to reel in the audience.

Provided that it gets an audience in the first place. Not all books do. If publishers see LotR knock-offs selling, then saying, "hey, my book is a bit like his, at first" could convince them to publish it, readers to pick it up, and they start off with the usualsort of start, then go somewhere new once the audience is hooked.

 

And this book was out before the sudden LOTR craze. True- the book's been popular for decades - but the audience for LOTR was significantly smaller in the time of the Eye's printing when compared to today.

the first big selling fantasy after LotR was a Tolkien rip-off. Sword of Shannara, in the 70s, was the first fantasy novel to enter the New York Times bestseller list. Thus there was already a substantial audience for the next JRRT years before EotW was

published. This is simple fact, and fact I mentioned in my last post. The LotR craze is not sudden, it is an enduringly popular

work, a classic. The fantasy market has changed a lot since the publication of EotW in the late 80s, and RJ's success may have been a factor that played a part in that.

 

everyone would have been like' date=' wtf? Get this loser out of here![/quote']You mean they're not already?

 

Everyone in the fantasy genre copies from each other

Everyone? Who' date=' in the fanatsy genre, was Neil Gaiman copying, or Gene wolfe, or Michael Swanwick, or Susanna Clarke? Who was Stephen Donaldson copying? Or george R.R. Martin, or Steven Erikson, or R. Scott Bakker? Or Jack Vance? Or Mervyn Peake? Tolkien himself? China Mieville? Lovecraft? Not to say that these people didn't draw inspiration from other writers, but that's not the same as copying, nor is it necessary for those sources to be within the fantasy genre. Martin is drawing on history, the wars of the Roses, for example. There may be other sources, but that is the primary one. Bakker also has historical sources, the First Crusade, and also philosophical ones. Clarke's Johnathan Strange & Mr Norrel is clearly channelling Austen.

Most of the worlds look alike, they have monsters which look alike (i mean orcs, elves, dwarves and so on).

How do these worlds look alike? And what looks like an Orc? Or an Elf or a Dwarf, for that matter?

 

true' date=' but WOW is gay[/quote']Is there a problem with a computer game liking another game of the same gender?

Brinsignr is out (my little brother bread it and would not stop carrying it around for 2 weeks, he even slept with it.)

Your brother bread it? Is he a baker? And I think sleeping with it takes bibliophilia a bit too far.

 

I'm a huge fan of both series.

Lord of the rings is not a series.

I think Jordan has done something no one else could do; he has more or less "Americanized" the epic high fantasy of Tolkien.

How would you say RJ has "Americanized" the sub-genre? I don't see it being based more in North American culture or history than anywhere else, the influences of other cultures are for more prominent - Eastern concepts such as the Wheel, for example, and the whole thing seems far less American, to me at least, than LotR seems British. Swanwick's The Iron Dragon's Daughter and Card's Tales of Alvin Maker are both far more American, although I'm not sure whether either is "epic high fantasy".

 

Several other Rand/Frodo parallels...

Geography parallels:

-River Erinin kind of similar to River Anduin; both go through most of the land, both go into a much larger body of water, both branch at that body of water.

You are really reaching with some of these. they both have a river? That goes through most of the land? Entering a larger body of water, like the sea? With a delta? Wow, never seen a river do that before. Rand and Frodo both lost body parts because of enemy action? What a rip-off. What next? I suppose they both have forests. Forests with trees!

[mb]

Lord of the Rings I do consider to be a series.  It is a group of books that deal with the same characters and/or that are related in subject.

 

Like Silmarillion, I would consider Hobbit to also be part of the Lord of the Rings series.

 

Several things that are explicit in both series (though may have differences)::

Wolves; in Wheel of Time they are good, in Lord of Rings and the other books they are bad.

Both have Ages; and like Lord of the Rings/Hobbit, Wheel of Time occurs in the Third Age

Andor; in Wheel of Time it is surrounded by other lands, in Silmarillion it is a nickname for Numenor and is an island.

Like Silmarillion, the headquarters of evil in Wheel of Time is in the north.

Like Lord of the Rings, the main enemy in Wheel of Time is named Dark Lord.

 

[Dreadlady]

Here's a couple more:

 

Mountains of Dhoom = Mount Doom

Mountains of Mist = Misty Mountains

[sillyman]

I think it would be hard to write a fantasy with out taking elements of LOR because the work is so influential on the fantasy genre.

 

Ents = orgier.

 

 

[bg.vince.earl@gmail.com]

One of my college professors quoted (don't know the original source) something like this:

 

"There are only two stories. Hero goes on a trip and stranger comes to town."

 

The rest of the quote I won't mangle by trying to get it right, but it basically noted that even those two stories are the same but from a different point of view.

 

I've long noticed a lot of similarities among fantasy books. But if you take out the weird creatures and magic and prophesies and the like, you've got a lot of similarities with just about every other type of literature.

 

Within fantasy, however, I've noticed these similarties:

 

-Young, naive hero has a great quest thrust upon him. He ultimately has to face the baddest guy around (Sauron, The Dark One, some immortal dark wizard, whatever).

 

-Hero always lives after the "golden age" (Age of Legends for WoT, early Simarillion for Tolkien, decades prior to Eragon).

 

-Magic is almost always either greatly diminished from previous ages or is being rediscovered (a la Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth.

 

-There's always a knowledable guide/mentor Galdalf, Morainne (spelling?), the old weird guy that just happens to be the last living dragon rider, Dumbledore, Merlin, etc. WoT even has several characters for this role: Morainne, Lan, Thom, Cadsuanne.

 

-There's always an important artifact(s). The One Ring. Callandor. The Seals. The sword of truth. The DragonLance.

 

-The horde. Orcs, goblins, trollocs, nameless masses of unscrupulous fellows willing to rape/pillage, etc.

 

-The immediate underlings of the dark lord. Nazgul, the Forsaken, the Forsworn.

 

It's not really fair to say that one author copies another for including the elements that seem to define the genre. And, given that Tolkien basically defined the genre, pretty much all fantasy can at least partially be traced to Tolkien. From there, its back to those two stories of hero goes on a trip and stranger comes to town.

[RAND AL THOR]

bg.vince , the points you quoted make up fantasy. Not essential, but often there.

 

One of my college professors quoted (don't know the original source) something like this:

 

"There are only two stories. Hero goes on a trip and stranger comes to town."

 

 

 

Having 12 books on how Rand enjoys farming is redundant. Having the book start in Shadar Logoth is also redundant. A solid beginning is needed.

 

 

 

-Young, naive hero has a great quest thrust upon him. He ultimately has to face the baddest guy around (Sauron, The Dark One, some immortal dark wizard, whatever).

 

Not always though. ASoFaI is a good example. All books have protagonists and antagonists. The more powerful the bad guy, the more interesting the story and the more emotional strain on the main character.

 

 

 

 

-Hero always lives after the "golden age" (Age of Legends for WoT, early Simarillion for Tolkien, decades prior to Eragon).

 

 

There's a reason for that too. WoT set in the AoL would not be nearly as interesting as the current setting. Everything prospers in the Golden Age. Do we want to read about how happy everyone was? No. We want difficult times. We want the characters struggling to accomplish tasks. A golden age is an obstacle there- because too many things are convenient. Take Travelling. The Eye of the World would become a 50 page book.

 

*Moiraine opens gateway from Two Rivers to Tar Valon*

 

That's why the golden age is long gone.

 

 

 

-There's always a knowledable guide/mentor Galdalf, Morainne (spelling?), the old weird guy that just happens to be the last living dragon rider, Dumbledore, Merlin, etc. WoT even has several characters for this role: Morainne, Lan, Thom, Cadsuanne.

 

Someone is needed to explain stuff. Gandalf was needed to provide data on the ring. Dumbledore was needed to explain stuff to Harry at the end of each book. Wise old men are the author's tools for getting some stuff across to the reader in an interesting way. The main character could always read a book to find out everything but, again, that's not as interesting.

 

 

 

 

-There's always an important artifact(s). The One Ring. Callandor. The Seals. The sword of truth. The DragonLance.

 

 

Not always. And most stories would fail without them.

 

 

 

-The horde. Orcs, goblins, trollocs, nameless masses of unscrupulous fellows willing to rape/pillage, etc.

 

 

Someone needed to hunt/chase/threaten main characters. We can't have a flock of geese chasing Rand into Shadar Logoth.

 

 

 

-The immediate underlings of the dark lord. Nazgul, the Forsaken, the Forsworn.

 

 

The Evil Overlord is usually too busy to do everything himself. He's going to have some servants to do the work. Some of those servants will inevitably climb to positions of power. The world works that way.

 

 

I was not attacking your post- just pointing out WHY these things occur repeatedly in Fantasy. Apologies in advance if anything seems offensive.

[sleddog116]

I suppose the Tolkien-esque archetypes do come naturally, but I believe the discussion (and then, it's more of an intellectual, respectful discussion than a heated "screaming match" argument) is about whether Tolkien was the one who created that sub-genre or if he just reinforced the traditional archetypes.

 

We see some of these elements in other stories throughout history - even in the Bible.  Look at the story of Elijah (btw, I'm not out to start a religious discussion - I'm just citing an example.) in the Old Testament.  He sort of falls into the "greatness thrust upon him" character.  Moses, too.

 

And, of course, you have that "sacrificial lamb" archetype that is also prevalent in most high fantasy; I didn't see that mentioned in big.vince.earl's post.  This character is usually the same as the knowledgeable guide/mentor.  (Like Brom from the Alegãesia books or Obi-Wan Kenobi from Star Wars.)

[RAND AL THOR]

Rand's 'nobility' and desperate attempts to evade his fate add spice to the story. The fact is, readers wouldn't be as interested in a selfish character that tries greedily welcomes his fate and misuses it. It happens in life, but do we want to read millions of words about a character like that?