The Gathering Storm Finished

[CUBAREY]

Well said, Cubarey. I am glad that your posts have convincingly refuted what Ludmain believes about this. I could not have said it better myself. However, despite the convincing strengths of your posts, Harriet's answers in her interview with Jason, and also Brandon Sanderson's blog where he clearly explained why AMOL is being split into three books... despite ALL of that, I still doubt that Ludmain and others will be convinced of the honesty and veracity of these explanations. To me, that is sad.

 

I would not mind so much if they were honest and said that they disagree with the decisions even though they were made by Harriet and Sanderson (only Mr Ares has come close to this). Look what ever decision was reached there would be people that would critize them that is not the problem. Criticizing the decisions as being against RJ's express wishes while refusing to acknowledge that Harriet and Doherty probably have a much better idea of what RJ would have wanted or agreed to then any of us is really what I object. That and trying to make Tor and Tom Doherty into some sinister money hungry entity just because they take into account the realities of the publishing business.

 

I can respect those who feel the decisions made were wrong its they way they do it that offends me.

[arkinia]

This is probably only a fraction of the time most of the people here have had their books, but I have had all my books for about 5 years which I would say is a pretty significant amount of time and they are no where near as tattered (I'd say not tattered at all) as you seem to suggest they should be. I guess I'm the exception, but I'm still amazed.

 

And you make excuses.

 

The binding are bad.

 

My dog likes books.

 

I confused it with a DDR mat.

 

You all should be ashamed and jealous of my care. You see, a book is like a child, you must handle it with all the care you can muster and nurture it with all your heart so you can read it and brag about it on the internet.

[CUBAREY]

This is probably only a fraction of the time most of the people here have had their books, but I have had all my books for about 5 years which I would say is a pretty significant amount of time and they are no where near as tattered (I'd say not tattered at all) as you seem to suggest they should be. I guess I'm the exception, but I'm still amazed.

 

And you make excuses.

 

The binding are bad.

 

My dog likes books.

 

I confused it with a DDR mat.

 

You all should be ashamed and jealous of my care. You see, a book is like a child, you must handle it with all the care you can muster and nurture it with all your heart so you can read it and brag about it on the internet.

 

And how many times have you read the series? I have read it 9 times, and several of the books a few more times. If you read it once and take care of it (and are lucky) you might have a set in decent shape. However, most "real fans" ;) have read the series multiple times and that takes a lot out of the books. :'(

[callandor]

@Ludmian

 

so your argument is that is is possible to publish a 1500 page book right? well yes, i guess that is possible. But disregarding publishers and bookstores not buying as many because of the size, the thing wouldn't last halfway before starting to fall apart. The books are binded horribly. So even if they could produce it, you have to buy it a few times if you ever wanted to read it again.

[Shard]

Well arkinia, I've had mine over well over a decade so the pages are going yellow even. I don't own a dog and don't even know what a DDR mat is. I simply just read and re-read my books over and over again. Took them on camping trips, where tFoH got soaked :(

 

My tSR book cover literally just CAME off one day and had to be ironed back on to it's binding. I take care of my books but the simple truth of the matter is that these are HUGE books even for Paperbacks. They don't take well to constant re-reading and moving around.

[Ludmian]

In the real world whether something is possible depends on whether it is financially feasable...

 

Arguments coming from Tor had nothing to do with financial feasibility. They said, among other even more ridiculous things, that

 

a) it's not possible to fit AMoL in one volume,

 

b) bookshops don't like long books (and by "long" he meant books about as long as 400,000 words, it's the length of TSR and LoC).

 

Point a has already been debunked. As for point b- I don't know what the bookshops like and don't like. But the fact remains, they sell encyclopaedias, collected works by Shakespear and other very long books. Tor publishes books that are longer than anything RJ ever wrote by far less popular authors. They even tell their writers to write longer books. (Examples of these has been mentioned in this discussion). But for some reason they think bookshops will be displeased with this particular novel.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Oxford-Advanced-Learners-Dictionary-Albert/dp/0194001016/ref=sr_oe_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241244496&sr=1-1

 

1780 pages, 9.5 x 6.4 x 2.2 inches. That's not something printed in a limited number of copies. It's a book used by many foreigners, including myself (though I've got 5th edition that is "just" 1400+ pages long. And don't tell me the authors of this dictionary worked on it for free.

 

Well said, Cubarey. I am glad that your posts have convincingly refuted what Ludmain believes about this. I could not have said it better myself. However, despite the convincing strengths of your posts, Harriet's answers in her interview with Jason, and also Brandon Sanderson's blog where he clearly explained why AMOL is being split into three books... despite ALL of that, I still doubt that Ludmain and others will be convinced of the honesty and veracity of these explanations. To me, that is sad.

 

Cubarey hasn't refuted anything. If he wants to refute anything, he should prove with figures that a possible one-volume edition of AMoL would cost significantly higher than, say, a super-duper edition of Edgar Poe or an Oxford dictionary. How much would the paper cost? How much Tor would have paid the printers per copy? How much royalties an author would be likely to get for a potential #1 bestseller?

 

And if you think that the decision to split AMoL came from Brandon and Harriet I can only quote Brandon one more time:

 

One of the most dominating points was this: it had been four years since the fans had been given KNIFE OF DREAMS. Tom felt that we NEEDED to provide them a book in 2009. They couldn't wait until I finished the entire volume to publish something.

 

http://www.brandonsanderson.com/article/56/Splitting-AMOL

 

Thta's it. Tor "needed" to publish something this Fall and they couldn't care less if the book is not finished. Would an author be comfortable with chopping off a portion of a half-finished novel? I find it very unlikely. Would Harriet suggest chopping off a portion of a half-finished AMoL? To say so is a real insult to her.

 

And if your copy falls apart before you even finished reading it it can mean

 

1) either that someone should be more careful with their books

 

2) or that someone should take more care about how the books they publish are printed,

 

none of which is a valid argument against publishing AMoL in one volume.

 

EDIT: And one more quote from Brandon:

 

It doesn't matter to me how many volumes Tor decides to make it; the story is the same to me. One volume, as Robert Jordan planned it. Enormous.

 

If it is split into chunks, I will push Tor to release them as soon as is reasonably possible and I will push hard for an omnibus edition at the end.

 

http://www.brandonsanderson.com/blog/770/Whats-Up-with-AMoL

 

This was written a few days before Tor's infamous press release. Most likely someone will twist both quotes into meaning something Brandon never intended, but for any unbiased person it should be clear by now that Brandon had nothing to do with chopping the unfinished book into pieces.

[Shard]

Ludmian, the book cover didn't fall off on the first, second or third re-read. I am also NOT the only person this has happened to either.

[Majsju]

But the fact remains, they sell encyclopaedias, collected works by Shakespear and other very long books. 

 

Shakespeare is a completely different matter, as volumes with his collected works are books that moves very slow. Most bookstores will only have a single copy on the shelves, and get a new from storage when that one is sold, which should be once every two or three months. A book like AMOL however is supposed to sell lots of volumes in a short time, and then continue to sell.

 

And attempting to bring encyclopedias into the mix is completely absurd. You can simp+ly not compare fiction and non-fiction in that way, the two are completely unrelated.

[Ludmian]

Ok, big volumes of Shakespear's works are published because a bookshop will order only one copy, so they are not that concerned about it's size. I recall that someone gave a similar explanation to Tor having no trouble publishing Ericson (bookshops will not order a lot of copies, so their size is not a concern for them, as opposed to a possible #1 bestselling AMoL). Ok, then what about this book:

 

http://www.amazon.com/Harry-Potter-Deathly-Hallows-Book/dp/0545010225/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241278826&sr=1-2

 

This argument obviously doesn't work in this case. I don't know the wordcount for this book, but 784 pages is longer than any hardcover by RJ. According to Tor a book that big is unpublishable in today's market. The publisher must have seriously pissed off bookshops with it.  ;D

[Mr Ares]

Given that his stated reason for the single volume in the first place was a refusal to compromise on quality, I find that unlikely. He would have produced the best AMoL he could.

 

His statement was based on his assessment when all he had were his notes and outlines. After actually being in the process of writing the story for over a year Sanderson is of the impression that there are two natural break points. Would RJ have agreed if he had the advantage of actually writing 400k+ of the story as Sanderson does? Maybe, maybe not. What we know is the person actually writing the end of WOT has no problem in breaking the story into three books.

Did you actually read what I wrote? Because you didn't actually respond to it. He said he wanted to produce the best "AMoL" he could, and that wouldn't change. If he thought it would be improved by splitting it, he would split it. If he had to make a choice between splitting and condensing, I think he would be more likely to split it. I said he would refuse to compromise the quality based on his desire for a single volume.

 

Particularly when you're in the same boat as us. Who are you calling black, Mr Pot?

 

I am not the one throwing a hissy fit because a story will not be published in what I believe is the only manner that the original author would have approved, even though the decision to publish the story as three books was made by the authors wife (who happens to also be the editor of the series) and the President of the publishing company who was a long term friend of the author.

No, you're the one throwing a hissy fit because some people have the temerity to have a different opinion, and to back that opinion up with facts. Facts like the authors wife admitting the author wouldn't have split the book. Well, you're one of them. There are others.

 

But he never made any promises that book 12 would not be split. Notice the difference?

He said one more book. If it is split, it is two. Unless RJ was talking about a magic one that is still one even when it is two. If it is split, we are left in the position of the two semi-coherent/one coherent, one incoherent book situation that he wanted to avoid - wanted to avoid by making one book that was as long as it needed to be. There really is no room for argument. His words preclude splitting the book.

 

I am sticking to the facts. I always have been.

No, you are not.

Of course I am. Just because you and others refuse to listen doesn't change that. Now I know how Cassandra felt.

 

You are deliberatly misinterprating what he said. What is important to understand here is that one book split in two (or three) parts is something very different from two completely separate books.

Not really, no. If there are two physical books, then there are two books. You can't really say "I have a book in each hand, therefore I am holding one book." If one book is turned into three separate books, it is three books. RJ wanted one. Splitting the book is something RJ's statements cannot be taken to support.

 

Your use of semantic argument is really starting to get tiresome.

Especially as he is wrong.

 

Much like Lord of the Rings was actually a finished manuscript for a single book, the publishers split it.

It should be noted that LotR is often thought of as a trilogy - as three books. And that, when split, each volume is not a complete narrative in its own right. It is structured as one novel, not as three, even when it is so split, so a simple splitting of AMoL would produce the very problem RJ didn't want - that of books lacking coherence by virtue of one novel being forced into two. Oh, and LotR has each volume ending at a natural break point as well.

 

All this entire conversation proves is that people will re-interpret whatever he said' date=' thought, or wanted to match what they say, think, and want.[/quote']No, it also proves a lot of people are unwilling to listen even to reasonable counter-arguments. That said, RJ saying x and then doing y should not be taken as evidence that when he said z, he would also have done y.

 

Who the frak cares whether AMOL should be one book or three books?

RJ.

The point is no one knows because RJ died before he finished the book.

While leaving behind several recorded statements to the effect that he would not split it' date=' that it would be one more book, no matter how big, even if Tor needed to invent a new binding process, etc., etc.

The only people that would have the best knowledge is Harriet, his boss, and his closest friends that he confided in.

Well, Harriet and Tom have both said that they don't think RJ would have split the book.

I don't see anywhere that RJ said the fans could question the choices that Tor, Harriet, or Brandon Sanderson could make.

I don't see anywhere that he didn't. I don't see where he said people were allowed to criticse the decisions he made, either, but they do that all the time. You see, there's this thing called freedom of speech...

 

I do hope that this interview of Harriet by Jason of Dragonmount.com answers questions as to what Harriet was thinking when it came to splitting AMOL.

Actually, it just raises further questions. For example: "You will notice that 3 x 250,000 equals 750,000." Does she think we're idiots? Does she not realise the wordcounts for all the books (including 394K for TSR) are available on the internet? "The major part of the decision was to get ALL the story that Jim left out there for us all." Is she unaware there are other ways to do that? See, it just raises further questions, not all of them cleared up by the article (which raises some of its own).

 

Maybe he wanted to try and finish it before he passed away' date=' and he could only do that in one book.[/quote']That argument is nonsensical and has been shot down before. It contradicts his stated reasons for one more book, and requires he be sufficiently deluded he believes that by keeping it as one there will magically be less to write.

 

That would make an 800k work closer to 33% larger than your estimate or 2k pages...not 1500.

We know that AMoL will be a long book, but precisely how large, how many pages, how heavy, etc., cannot be determined with any degree of accuracy. Too many variables. I already proved that.

 

but Harriet has stated that she believes that RJ would have been happy with the way it was being written and published.

Funny, because she has also said that RJ wouldn't split the book, given the chance. Like I said, the article raises further questions. It doesn't make sense, not unless you start ignoring inconvenient facts. Which I won't do, hence my continuing problem with what we have.

 

my copy of KOD did not make it through the first reading before it started to fall apart

Which says nothing about the possibility of it being done right, and everything about Tor not being very good at binding books properly. Funny, all these stories about everyone else having books falling to bits, and my copy of Eye of the World (that I bought from a library) is battered but still holds together. No pages missing (except those torn out by the library when they sold it).

 

But' date=' really I handle my books like babies.[/quote']You get the wife to look after them?

 

In the real world whether something is possible depends on whether it is financially feasable.

"So... part of the decision was based on making a book within the scope of binding technology." That's not a comment that addresses the financial feasability of it, it's one that addresses the technological limitations. The ability to bind it is the limitation she addresses, not the cost.

 

And the books do tend to fall apart even at half the length of the new one

Do you have the American ones? Because they are notoriously bad, and is the fault of Tor. Buy British.

 

I would not mind so much if they were honest and said that they disagree with the decisions even though they were made by Harriet and Sanderson (only Mr Ares has come close to this).

It might help if I understood why they made those decisions. Then I might agree they are good enough.

 

To give an example:

In January, Tom called Harriet and they talked. At this point, I'd hit my 400k goal, and I knew that I was only about halfway done. (If even that far along.) Very little of that 400k had been revised or drafted. Tom and Harriet chatted, and several things came up. One of the most dominating points was this: it had been four years since the fans had been given KNIFE OF DREAMS. Tom felt that we NEEDED to provide them a book in 2009. They couldn't wait until I finished the entire volume to publish something.

Why does that paragraph end? They couldn't wait...where's the because? Why couldn't they wait? The given reason is not just inadequate, it's non-existent.

 

Or how about this:

But you are also splitting a book that Robert Jordan intended to be one book. (Tom and Harriet both have said they don't think he could have done it, or would have done it, given the chance.)

Now, some people misinterpret this, they take it to mean that RJ wouldn't have made this one book given the chance, which makes no sense. If Tor allowed him to make a single volume, complete AMoL, wouldn't he take the opportunity? All the evidence we have indicates that's what he wanted, so of course he would. The only explanation that makes sense, aside from BS saying something other than what he meant, is that he wouldn't split it given the chance. So, Harriet and Tom agree that RJ wouldn't split this book. And yet:

How do you think Jim would feel about the way the book is being handled, both writing it and publishing it?

 

I think he would be pleased.

He wouldn't do it, but he would be pleased? He is fine for someone else to do it? No, I'm not convinced. It doesn't add up. The big issue is not the split in three, but the publication of the first book this year, as opposed to three in quick succession. Apparently the fans need it (why?), and apparently this is a promise to booksellers that can't be changed (unlike all those other ones they make, which can be).

[Telzen]

Man read the whole thread. I agree with CUBAREY, Majsju and the others on this. As to the books, my hardcovers(25+ dollars each) have never had any problems. I do treat them well though. I lent two to my friend though, we'll see what happens to those.

[Majsju]

This argument obviously doesn't work in this case. I don't know the wordcount for this book, but 784 pages is longer than any hardcover by RJ. According to Tor a book that big is unpublishable in today's market. The publisher must have seriously pissed off bookshops with it.  ;D

 

My HC copy of LOC has 716 numbered pages. AMOL right now is slightly more than twice as long, ie around 1500 pages.

[Roxinos]

This argument obviously doesn't work in this case. I don't know the wordcount for this book, but 784 pages is longer than any hardcover by RJ. According to Tor a book that big is unpublishable in today's market. The publisher must have seriously pissed off bookshops with it

 

Yeah.... I'm not quite sure Tor or anyone from it has ever said that an 800 page book is unpublishable...

 

Especially considering the fact that they have published paperback books that are longer than 800 pages. So...you're an idiot arguing a non-point.

 

See, you're not an idiot because you're wrong. You're just an idiot because you're arguing a non-point.

[Majsju]

Kids, stop calling eachother idiots. It is perfectly possibly to insult others without having to resort to invectives. ;D

 

Ok, carry on.

 

 

[Roxinos]

...You're an idiot.

 

;D

 

I keed, I keed! Don't kill me, Maj!

[CUBAREY]

Did you actually read what I wrote? Because you didn't actually respond to it. He said he wanted to produce the best "AMoL" he could, and that wouldn't change. If he thought it would be improved by splitting it, he would split it. If he had to make a choice between splitting and condensing, I think he would be more likely to split it. I said he would refuse to compromise the quality based on his desire for a single volume.

 

 

The reason gave for insisting on one volume is that he did not believe that it could be cut into two or more volumes without compromising the quality. Sanderson believes that their are natural break points that allow the story to be devided into three volumes. Therefore, the question is if RJ would have lived would he still believe that the story could not be split after writing 400k words. No one can really answer that I am satisfied that the person actually writing the work believes it can be cut without lessening the quality.

 

 

No, you're the one throwing a hissy fit because some people have the temerity to have a different opinion, and to back that opinion up with facts. Facts like the authors wife admitting the author wouldn't have split the book. Well, you're one of them. There are others.

 

As I stated, by real problem is with those who argue against the decision to split AMOL and insist that It's just a money grab by TOR as they conveniently forget that both Sanderson and Harriet were part of the decision making process. I disagree with your opinion but as I indicated in my previous post at least you have the integrity to blame Harriet instead of just whining about Tor's greediness.

 

 

 

It should be noted that LotR is often thought of as a trilogy - as three books. And that, when split, each volume is not a complete narrative in its own right. It is structured as one novel, not as three, even when it is so split, so a simple splitting of AMoL would produce the very problem RJ didn't want - that of books lacking coherence by virtue of one novel being forced into two. Oh, and LotR has each volume ending at a natural break point as well.

 

 

It should be noted that AMOL was not a stand alone book, it lacks coherence by itself you must read the first elevin novels in order for it to be coherent. RJ's unwillingness to split AMOL was based on the fact that he believed that if it was split it at best would make one good book and one not so good book. He believed this at a time where he had notes, an outline and an ending but had not began writing the actual work. After writing 400k words Sanderson is of an opposite opinion. While I would have preferred RJ finished the series he died before that was possible. Since I consider Sanderson not only a good writer but one who is interested in forefilling RJ's legacy I trust his determination that AMOL can be cut into three volumes, all being quality novels.

 

I don't see anywhere that he didn't. I don't see where he said people were allowed to criticse the decisions he made, either, but they do that all the time. You see, there's this thing called freedom of speech...

 

I point out that freedom of speech also protects idiotic, hateful and plain wrong opinions. Not that I believe that your opinion is either idiotic or hateful (unlike some of the comments by other people on this thread).

 

He wouldn't do it, but he would be pleased? He is fine for someone else to do it? No, I'm not convinced. It doesn't add up. The big issue is not the split in three, but the publication of the first book this year, as opposed to three in quick succession. Apparently the fans need it (why?), and apparently this is a promise to booksellers that can't be changed (unlike all those other ones they make, which can be).

 

Well let's take a broader view of the issue. It should first be noted that Harriet, Doherty  and others close to RJ are in the best position to determine how serious he was about the statement that there was only going to be one book and how much of the stqatement was hyperbole.  What RJ desperately wanted was that the WOT story be finished as thoroughly as possible and that it be of high quality. His opposition to splitting AMOL was not based on the fact that he wanted only one more book but that he believed that there was no way to seperate the remaining story without lessoning the quality. Sanderson has written 400k words and now believes that the story can be coherently split into three pieces without harming the intergrity of the work. At the time of her statement Harriet had read a significant portion of that completed portion of the manuscript and was aware that Sanderson not only believed the story could be split into three books but was willing to take the extra time and effort to complete the entire story (and not skim on parts just to get finished). Thus Harriet could easily believe that RJ would be pleased because not only would the entire story be finished (without leaving parts out to save on time) but the quality of the work would not been compromised.

[Ludmian]

This argument obviously doesn't work in this case. I don't know the wordcount for this book, but 784 pages is longer than any hardcover by RJ. According to Tor a book that big is unpublishable in today's market. The publisher must have seriously pissed off bookshops with it

 

Yeah.... I'm not quite sure Tor or anyone from it has ever said that an 800 page book is unpublishable...

 

Especially considering the fact that they have published paperback books that are longer than 800 pages. So...you're an idiot arguing a non-point.

 

See, you're not an idiot because you're wrong. You're just an idiot because you're arguing a non-point.

 

Are you sure?

 

By this point, I'd already warned Tom and Harriet that I saw the length being very large, but I hadn't told Tom the 700-800k number. When I'd mentioned 400k to him once, he'd been wary. He explained to me that he felt 400k was unprintably large in today's publishing market. Things have changed since the 90's, and booksellers are increasingly frustrated with the fantasy genre, which tends to take up a lot of shelf space with very few books.

 

Again, I don't know how long the last Harry Potter is in wordcount, but I believe bookshops are concerned with the book's actual size (if Tom tells us the truth), not with how many words are in it, and the last Harry Potter is longer than RJ's two 400,000-word novels.

 

This argument obviously doesn't work in this case. I don't know the wordcount for this book, but 784 pages is longer than any hardcover by RJ. According to Tor a book that big is unpublishable in today's market. The publisher must have seriously pissed off bookshops with it.  ;D

 

My HC copy of LOC has 716 numbered pages. AMOL right now is slightly more than twice as long, ie around 1500 pages.

 

Irrelevant. As I've shown above Tom Doherty's notion of "unpublishable" starts far before 1500 pages and includes, among other things, TSR, LoC and the last Harry Potter book.

 

Did you actually read what I wrote? Because you didn't actually respond to it. He said he wanted to produce the best "AMoL" he could, and that wouldn't change. If he thought it would be improved by splitting it, he would split it. If he had to make a choice between splitting and condensing, I think he would be more likely to split it. I said he would refuse to compromise the quality based on his desire for a single volume.

 

 

The reason gave for insisting on one volume is that he did not believe that it could be cut into two or more volumes without compromising the quality. Sanderson believes that their are natural break points that allow the story to be devided into three volumes. Therefore, the question is if RJ would have lived would he still believe that the story could not be split after writing 400k words. No one can really answer that I am satisfied that the person actually writing the work believes it can be cut without lessening the quality.

 

Did you actually read Brandon's blog? Or at least the quotes from it I posted here? It was not Brandon Sanderson who decided that AMoL could be split. It was Tor's decision. And after Tor decided to split AMoL into three novels Brandon had to look for two places in the story where it could be done more naturally. That makes a big difference.

[Roxinos]

Are you sure?

 

Quite sure.

 

Again, I don't know how long the last Harry Potter is in wordcount, but I believe bookshops are concerned with the book's actual size (if Tom tells us the truth), not with how many words are in it, and the last Harry Potter is longer than RJ's two 400,000-word novels.

 

You're almost as bad as mb.

 

Saying, "...unprintably large..." does not mean that it is physically impossible to print it. It does not mean that bookstores will not accept it. It does not mean that printers will not print them. It means that Tom felt that 400k was not a smart move. Bookstores would not be happy. The printers would not be happy. Consumers would be happy to receive the books, but not happy about the binding which sucks in general. Etc. etc.

 

He's also talking about currently. Now, not then. Naturally, his viewpoints are financially motivated; but that's how a good publisher works.

 

Whatever, this point is boring me.

 

Just for fun:

 

Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone - 76,944 words

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets - 85,141 words

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban - 107,253 words

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire - 190,637 words

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix - 257,045 words

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince - 168,923

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Approximately 198,227

 

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_total_word_count_for_the_%27Harry_Potter%27_series

 

It was Tor's decision. And after Tor decided to split AMoL into three novels Brandon had to look for two places in the story where it could be done more naturally. That makes a big difference.

 

Tor's decision. Read: Harriet and Tom's decision.

 

Does it matter that Tom decided to split the book and then asked Brandon to find a point where what he had written could be split? I mean, does the time-frame really matter? If Brandon had gone to Tom and said, "Oh, I found a point while writing that it could be split. Do you want to go with that?" would you be more accepting to the decision?

[The Doctor]

They made the longest book into the shortest movie, just because Grindhouse did lousy box office.  Hollywood is ASSININE I say!

[water_seeker]

Let's just drop the back and forth on this subject. 

 

Those who are ok with Tor's decision are going to go to the bookstore (or order online) happily when the book comes out, they're going to read it and crash all the online sites such as this one with all the posts they make.

 

Those who are upset at the decision are going to go to the bookstore (or order online) reluctantly and they're going to post about the book just like everyone else.  OR they're not going to buy the book and posting their complaints here is just an exercise in futility since there's not a damn thing that can be done about it anyway.

 

Either way Capitalism wins and we have a book.

 

BTW, if you live in or around MI and you want a free kitten...LOL

[CUBAREY]

Did you actually read Brandon's blog? Or at least the quotes from it I posted here? It was not Brandon Sanderson who decided that AMoL could be split. It was Tor's decision. And after Tor decided to split AMoL into three novels Brandon had to look for two places in the story where it could be done more naturally. That makes a big difference.

 

First the decision was made by Tor and Harriet. Second, you misquote Sanderson he stated that there were two places where their were natural brakes not two places where the split could be done more naturally. A rather large distinction. Third, If Sanderson would have said that there were no natural breaks or only one natural brakes  I doubt that the novel would have been split into three books. They would of had to have dealt with the problems of publishing a 1500 page novel in a way that it was financially feasible (quite a hard proposition) and dealt with the problem of having very disgruntled booksellers and fans (many of which would be as upset of waiting till till 2011 to get a book that was originally supposed to come out in 2008 (estimate when RJ was still alive) and later changed to 2009. Lastly, Sanderson was hired by Harriet, his contract is with her in her role as Administratrix of RJ's estate, it is Harriet who has the legal right to determine the shape that story will take. If Harriet decided that AMOL had to be published as a one volume story all that TOR could legally do is refuse to publish the book that way and demand that any advance received by RJ be paid back. Which would mean that Harriet would be free to sell the rights to publish the book to another publisher that agreed to publish it as one volume. The fact that Harriet agreed to the split means that at the very least she concurs with Tors estimation of the problems involved in publishing a 1500 page novel in today's bookselling reality and with Sanderson's belief that the story can be split into three books without harming it's quality.

[Ludmian]

Kids, stop calling eachother idiots. It is perfectly possibly to insult others without having to resort to invectives. ;D

 

Ok, carry on.

 

Calling each other? Would you, please, provide a quote where I called Roxinos an idiot? And while we are at it, I repeat my previous request. Will you please, provide a quote where Tor promises us a book in Fall 2009?

 

Are you sure?

 

Quite sure.

 

Again, I don't know how long the last Harry Potter is in wordcount, but I believe bookshops are concerned with the book's actual size (if Tom tells us the truth), not with how many words are in it, and the last Harry Potter is longer than RJ's two 400,000-word novels.

 

You're almost as bad as mb.

 

Saying, "...unprintably large..." does not mean that it is physically impossible to print it. It does not mean that bookstores will not accept it. It does not mean that printers will not print them. It means that Tom felt that 400k was not a smart move. Bookstores would not be happy. The printers would not be happy. Consumers would be happy to receive the books, but not happy about the binding which sucks in general. Etc. etc.

 

That's what I was talking about. Various publishers are not afraid to piss off printers and bookstores with books that are unprintable in today's market, according to Tom Doherty. Even Tor is not afraid to piss off printers and bookstores with books that are unprintable in today's market, according to Tom Doherty. For some reason the issue of "unprintability in today's market" only comes into question with AMoL. What I meant in my post is obvious. Although you made it clear long ago that you not only haven't read Brandon's article, Harriet's interview and Tor's press release. You don't read this discussion either, including the posts you are responding to. You just pick up a randon sentence from a post and start talking some completely irrelevant BS.

 

It was Tor's decision. And after Tor decided to split AMoL into three novels Brandon had to look for two places in the story where it could be done more naturally. That makes a big difference.

 

Tor's decision. Read: Harriet and Tom's decision.

 

Does it matter that Tom decided to split the book and then asked Brandon to find a point where what he had written could be split? I mean, does the time-frame really matter? If Brandon had gone to Tom and said, "Oh, I found a point while writing that it could be split. Do you want to go with that?" would you be more accepting to the decision?

 

He didn't, and he wouldn't have done that. Period. Unlike some people here, he respects RJ and his vision. The quotes I posted here make it absolutely clear. Though, of course, you haven't read them neither here, nor in Brandon's blog.

 

 

Did you actually read Brandon's blog? Or at least the quotes from it I posted here? It was not Brandon Sanderson who decided that AMoL could be split. It was Tor's decision. And after Tor decided to split AMoL into three novels Brandon had to look for two places in the story where it could be done more naturally. That makes a big difference.

 

First the decision was made by Tor and Harriet. Second, you misquote Sanderson he stated that there were two places where their were natural brakes not two places where the split could be done more naturally. A rather large distinction.

 

Again, nobody here has yet been able to catch me misquoting or misrepresenting anything. In case you haven't noticed, I wasn't quoting Brandon. I was retelling what he said in his article about splitting AMoL in my own words, but remaining true to the article. I searched for words "natural break" there and got nothing. It seems to me he did use these exact words somewhere else, but again it's irrelevant. It's only a matter of word choice. He was told to look for points to break AMoL into three novels, he had to search for them. That's what matters. But if you need exact quotes from Brandon-

 

3) You could do what Tom did. You go to Brandon (or, in this case, to Harriet who goes to Brandon) and you say "You have 400k words. Is there a division point in there somewhere that you can cut the book and give us a novel with a strong climax and a natural story arc?"

 

I spent a few days in January looking over the material, and came to Tom and Harriet with a proposal. I had what I felt would make the best book possible, divided in a certain way, which came out to be around 275,000 words. It had several strong character arcs, it told a very good story, and it closed several important plot threads. I felt it would be an excellent book...

 

I feel that the next chunk is going to need a lot more revision than this one did. Partially because I cut into the 450k completed portion with the hacksaw and pulled out 275k. What's left over is ragged and in need of a lot of work.

 

http://www.brandonsanderson.com/article/56/Splitting-AMOL

 

Third, If Sanderson would have said that there were no natural breaks or only one natural brakes  I doubt that the novel would have been split into three books.

 

What can I say? LOL

 

They would of had to have dealt with the problems of publishing a 1500 page novel in a way that it was financially feasible (quite a hard proposition) and dealt with the problem of having very disgruntled booksellers and fans (many of which would be as upset of waiting till till 2011 to get a book that was originally supposed to come out in 2008 (estimate when RJ was still alive) and later changed to 2009.

 

Could you, please, clarify who supposed that it would come out in 2008. As for the rest of the quote, again LOL.

 

Lastly, Sanderson was hired by Harriet, his contract is with her in her role as Administratrix of RJ's estate, it is Harriet who has the legal right to determine the shape that story will take. If Harriet decided that AMOL had to be published as a one volume story all that TOR could legally do is refuse to publish the book that way and demand that any advance received by RJ be paid back. Which would mean that Harriet would be free to sell the rights to publish the book to another publisher that agreed to publish it as one volume. The fact that Harriet agreed to the split means that at the very least she concurs with Tors estimation of the problems involved in publishing a 1500 page novel in today's bookselling reality and with Sanderson's belief that the story can be split into three books without harming it's quality.

 

Don't claim you know all the details of RJ's and Harriet's contracts with Tor. Or are you Harriet's lawyer?

[Mr Ares]

Therefore, the question is if RJ would have lived would he still believe that the story could not be split after writing 400k words. No one can really answer that.

True, but Harriet doesn't think he would split it, which indicates she is perhaps not convinced that this will be an improvement.

 

RJ's unwillingness to split AMOL was based on the fact that he believed that if it was split it at best would make one good book and one not so good book.

Coherent was his word.

 

Third, If Sanderson would have said that there were no natural breaks or only one natural brakes  I doubt that the novel would have been split into three books. They would of had to have dealt with the problems of publishing a 1500 page novel in a way that it was financially feasible (quite a hard proposition) and dealt with the problem of having very disgruntled booksellers and fans (many of which would be as upset of waiting till till 2011 to get a book that was originally supposed to come out in 2008 (estimate when RJ was still alive) and later changed to 2009.

"Tom felt that we NEEDED to provide them a book in 2009. They couldn't wait until I finished the entire volume to publish something." So they had to put something out, and decided to put out the best thing they could by the end of the year, rather than just the best thing they could.

[Majsju]

Calling each other? Would you, please, provide a quote where I called Roxinos an idiot? And while we are at it, I repeat my previous request. Will you please, provide a quote where Tor promises us a book in Fall 2009?

 

I have never said any such thing, so stop bothering me about this.

 

 

[Ludmian]

Calling each other? Would you, please, provide a quote where I called Roxinos an idiot? And while we are at it, I repeat my previous request. Will you please, provide a quote where Tor promises us a book in Fall 2009?

 

I have never said any such thing, so stop bothering me about this.

 

The first of the two things I mentioned you did say, so will you, please, provide a quote where I call Roxinos an idiot? As for the second one, do you then agree with me that this particular argument from Tor is rubbish?