Last 3 books, Titles

[Bob T Dwarf]

Ah, Ludmian, you do have a talent for failing to grasp the obvious.

 

Shakespeare is considered by many to be the greatest writer of all time.  Why?  Because he knew what to include and what to leave out, letting the reader fill in the blanks from his or her own imagination.  He neither spelled everything out in excruciating detail nor repeated the same set of phrases each time he spelled it out like Jordan did.  He made the reader an active participant in the telling of the story.

 

Based on how he wrote, I suspect that Jordan was more a fan of Sinclair Lewis than he was of Shakespeare.

[Vambram]

its great to see more attacks from Eighty89 against RJ. [sarcasm]

[water_seeker]

paragraph long rant about a bit of joshing

 

Thou shalt not use my name in vain...lol

[Ludmian]

Ludmian, thanks for the quote tip, but i couldn't quite work it out. Will have to play around with it when i have more time. I'll put your quotes in another colour to distinguish them and leave my responses in normal colour.

 

You are welcome. Once you play around with it a little, you'll quickly get used to it.

 

"I don't think there can be a helthy discussion with someone who interprets everything that is said or done, has been said or done or could possibly have been said or done as part of a global conspiracy."

 

Don't know how you interpret this as me thinking there is a global conspiracy.

 

I've already explained why I compare your opinion to conspiracy theories.

 

"Why do you think that Wikipedia can possibly know more about WoT than RJ? Where could they possibly get the information from?"

 

Wikipedia gets its info from everyday people.

 

That's what I'm talking about. Why do you think "everyday people" can have more information than the author?

 

By the way I looked what Wikipedia actually says about "6 books". Here's what I found:

 

Originally planned as a six-book series, it now consists of eleven published novels, with one more book to come, which will be published in three volumes.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wheel_of_Time

 

Think you posted this quote. Note that it doesn't give the source for this information. It also contains another obvious error. It says there is one more book to come that will be published in three volumes. Wrong. There will be three more novels, each of them published in one volume. At least, as far as we know at the moment.

 

Another quote from the same page:

 

In the early 1980s Robert Jordan wrote several Conan the Barbarian novels for Tor Books, including a novelization of the movie Conan the Destroyer. These proved successful and in 1984 he proposed an idea for an epic fantasy series of six books to Tom Doherty, the head of Tor Books.[citation needed]

 

Note the "citation needed" tag. Wikipedia is not very reliable by default, but if this tag is used, it screams, "Someone wrote this from memory. I really don't know if the guy knew what he was doing, so don't blame me if you find out that RJ actually planned a 60-book series".

 

Again, I know where all this talk about "6 books" is coming from. I could explain to you the history of the series at length. There are people here who could do this much better than me. But it would be a waste of time. You'll either ignore it and stick to your half-truths and misinformation, or misinterpret it to support your delusions.

 

 

That is the whole concept. It relies on weight of numbers to refine the info on it. It is an open document. The quote from wikipedia was backed up by the same quote from numerous other sites (check the history of this thread).

 

The quote from Wikipedia is not backed up by anything RJ ever said.

 

I don't think they know more than RJ concerning WOT (never said that). My argument is that RJ and Tor, etc have been providing misleading info over a number of books.

 

Your arguement is that RJ was a habitual liar.

 

 

See my post on excuses, justifications, etc. These go hand in hand with the sliding 3 more books to go quotes you found me.

 

Those "sliding" comments have a far more simple explanation than your "conspiracy theories". The explanation is: In many cases it's impossible to predict how many words it will take you to write something. A lot of people here, including myself, have tried to make you understand it, but still you refuse. I wonder where Elgee saw reason in your post.

 

 

Like i said all i can do is provide evidence / quotes / info and my humble opinion on them. Of course, this obviously differs to yours.

 

There can't possibly exist an evidence that wouldn't support your opinion. If RJ says or does X you say it supports your opinion. If RJ says or does "minus X" you say that it also supports your opinion. Again, I wonder where Elgee saw reason in your posts.  :-\

 

 

The only time I brought up Martin was in relation to killing off characters (never about stringing his series out). So I don't believe it is relevant to my argument about stringing out WOT. For the record, i have not read past book 2, so I cannot really comment on whether he is stringing it out (I can't provide a personal opinion on whether the writing has declined, secondary characters have been given too much time, unnecessary tangents have been taken, etc. But what does it matter whether I think other writers do or don't strectch out series? I am talking about WOT in this thread.

 

My question is absolutely relevant to the discussion. You say that a series can't blow out from 6 books to 14 accidentally. I'm asking you, is your statement true only with those numbers? Can a series blow out from 3 books to 7 "accidentally"?

 

"No, only to people who post lies, insults, and BS."

 

I've posted no lies, just opinions.

 

You've posted a lot of lies.

 

All quotes have been found on the internet (make of them what you will) or have been quotes from fellow posters. Personal opinion isn't lies. Insults have been very tame and you've certainly slung enough of your own mud. BS: see my comment on lies. Same thing really.

 

Could you have found quotes where "consumers" express there discontent with the series without obvious lies, f-words and the BS about "RJ dying to piss off his fans"? I bet you could. But you chose not to. It says a lot about you as a person.

 

My understanding of this series was that it was originally conceived as a trilogy and then early on Jordan admitted that he saw it becoming a 6 book series.

 

"Could be taken for a misinformed opinion, but as you insist on sticking to this misinformation, then it's a lie."

 

Allow me to again post the quote from Tom Doherty:

 

From http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TrilogyCreep:

 

"At World Con 2008 Tom Doherty of Tor Books finally put this long-standing rumour to rest: it was originally planned to be six books when Robert Jordan proposed the series to him in 1984, before he even started writing the first book."

That quote is found in numerous other places. Doesn't sound like misinformed opinion to me?

 

It's not a quote from Tom Doherty. It's a quote from someone who is retelling what Tom Doherty said. I don't know what stood in the contract RJ signed with Tor back in 1984, but the part about RJ "planning a 6-book series" is a wrong word choice either on the part of Tom Doherty or more likely the person who wrote it.

 

I know that jordan died before the series was finished just to piss everyone off

 

Horrible insulting BS.

 

I've already explained that i don't agree with this and how it ended up in the post as part of a larger quote i did not cut parts out of. Why revisit?

 

I've already explained that it can't be a matter of agreement or disagreement. I also explained it to you that the rest of the quote doesn't make you look better for posting it. No, you really don't understand why you shouldn't have posted what you have posted.  ::)

 

writing new spring instead of working on the core books when he knew he was in bad health is proof of that.

 

A lie.

 

Not my quote. One part of larger post i used in reasoning for another point, so same explanation as the last paragraph.

 

I never said it was yours. But you really should think what you are copypasting as a support to your arguments.

 

After every book from about book seven onwards, he kept saying he was only about 2 away from finishing:

 

A lie.

 

It's not a lie. About 2 (about being a key word) is not very different to 3 really (only 1 number), now is it? I couldn't find the exact quotes at the time, but you so kindly did find numerous examples of the 3 book quote, eg:

 

A lie. The main difference is not whether RJ mentioned 2 books or three books. The key words are "only" and "at least". "Only two" means "two, no more no less". "At least three" means "any number starting from three". Still don't grasp the difference? Let's look at the following examples:

 

"For copypasting BS from various corners of the Internet Eighty89 is sentenced to only three minutes of flogging."

 

"For copypasting BS from various corners of the Internet Eighty89 is sentenced to at least three minutes of flogging."

 

Is it only a matter of word choice or can one of these examples result in you being unable to sit at your computer for a longer time? :)

 

This last quote is the crux of my argument. It isn't a firm answer. It allowed him to string it out without being pinned down to naming how many. The firm response didn't come out to he started talking about one more book for AMOL (sadly now 3).

 

And his refusal to give a definite number of books has a quite reasonable explanation that I mentioned earlier.

 

 

 

It's not twisting. It's using quotes or info to support my reasoning. That's the whole idea.

 

As I said, RJ could not possibly have said or done anything that would not support your reasoning.

 

Just like a debator (sp?) or writing an essay. I use quotes / info to support my view. Like i said, that's the whole idea of building a case. Let me use your line if i may: "Again, it's IMHO". You may view it as "twisting" because it differs from your view. Sounds a bit like kid who responds with name calling because they can't think of a structured or sensible argument.

 

My posts are as sensible as they can possibly be when you are discussing something with a person who says that both X and "minus X" support his argument, who openly refuses to get acquainted with the fact, uses dirty tricks and avoids giving straightforward answer to relevant questions. Speaking of dirty trick, I've mentioned how you misused the quote from a chat several times, but you choose to ignore that part of my posts. I wonder why.  :-\

 

 

"Disregard the facts and stick to some half-truths and obvious errors that you found somewhere, just because they support your views better."

 

There are no obvious errors.

 

There are. I've already mentioned them.

 

 

It's all material that is out there. It's all up for interpretation. And what do you mean by facts? Please don't tell me you are going to argue that just because Robert Jordan or Tor or Harriet or Brandon say something that it is an absolute fact.

 

I insist that what the author says is the only source of information about the writing of the series. If the author never said WoT was planned as a six book series, and someone says it was, it means that the other person has either misunderstood something or is deliberately misrepresenting the author. As I said, I understand where all this talk about "6 books" is coming from, but it's no use explaining the series' history to you.

 

 

One of the main points of my argument is that they have been putting out misleading comments and constantly changing their story.

 

No, they haven't.

 

its great to see more attacks from Eighty89 against RJ. [sarcasm]

 

Yes, it is.  ::)

 

Ah, Ludmian, you do have a talent for failing to grasp the obvious.

 

 

You do have a talent for avoiding questions (I mean the one about good fiction with active readers) and speaking of the things you have no idea of (I mean the comparative size of RJ's novels and Shakespeare's collected works).

 

Shakespeare is considered by many to be the greatest writer of all time.  Why?  Because he knew what to include and what to leave out, letting the reader fill in the blanks from his or her own imagination.  He neither spelled everything out in excruciating detail nor repeated the same set of phrases each time he spelled it out like Jordan did.  He made the reader an active participant in the telling of the story.

 

Did Shakespeare wrote epic novels? No. Did RJ wrote sonnets and plays? No (at least, we are not aware of it). Sonnets and plays are not the forms where you can spell everything in excruciating details. Novels are not written like

 

M i n (enters): Rand!

 

R a n d (runs to her): Min!

 

Based on how he wrote, I suspect that Jordan was more a fan of Sinclair Lewis than he was of Shakespeare.

 

RJ mentioned many times what writers he was a fan of. Sinclair Lewis was not among them. *shudders at the thought that RJ could be a fan of Sinclair Lewis*

[Mr Ares]

It's along one

Paging Elgee to the thread.

I saw.

I thought about giving a short grammar lesson

I had chocolate instead.

A wise choice.

 

The "difference" you are pointing out has nothing to do with what RJ and Brandon actually said. Both RJ and Brandon obviously meant one big' date=' big novel in a big, big book.[/quote']Right... Roll Eyes

So what did he mean when he said: "After Knife of Dreams, there's going to be one more main-sequence Wheel of Time novel", "It may be a 2,000-page hardcover", "if I'm going to make it a coherent novel it's all got to be in one volume." You can hardly spin one volume into the usual rubbish about one-book-in-multiple-volumes - AMoL Volumes I&II is explicitly ruled out of his intentions.

 

People, where do you all get this crazy idea that RJ thought he could write one 2000-page novel faster than a few books 2000 page in total.

 

Because one book of 2000 pages takes less time to write (as a practical matter) then three books totalling 2000 pages. If you have no health concerns you probably write the three novels (if you figure out logical break points) if you had health issues you try to write one book (as once it is written it can be edited, printed and published without you).

If you have health concerns, you have a valid reason not to go on the publicity tours, which are what adds the time.

 

And that problem' date=' is that besides RJ's closest family and friends, none of us know what he said to them concerning the writing and finishing of AMOL[/quote']Except for what they tell us, and they told us RJ wouldn't split the book.

 

Mr Ares: Yes' date=' the quotes of yours do back up my belief. You choose to interpret them one way, I interpret them another.[/quote']In other words, you have no facts to support you.

the refusal to commit to a firm number of books

Well, if he doesn't know how many it will be, surely it is wiser not to commit? If he said "there will be one more", and then subsequently we get told "actually, it's three more" then you're bound to ruffle a few feathers. If you say "not sure how many more, but about three", then you give yourself plenty of wriggle room.

(my gut instinct is Tor certainly leant on him to do this as well)

Alternatively, the success of the series made Tor more willing to give RJ freedom in terms of how many books would be published, thus resulting in a series that was closer to his vision. You have no facts to support you.

Like I said the longer the series was out the more exposure it got and new readers, and thus every new book had a larger reader base and thus could more easily be best sellers.

Exactly. So, despite the negative feedback, people's dislike was not sufficient to convince them to stop reading - quite the reverse. Therefore there was no immediate need to end the series. If he wanted to spin it out, he could do so through more than just one more book.

My point is that there was too much superfluous stuff padding the good stuff.

Which stuff was superfluous, in your opinion? And regardless of padding, most all the books justify their existence of separate books, so even by cutting out padding, all you end up with is shorter, not fewer, books. Which does rather undermine your point about it being extended for length, as 12/14 books is still the same number of books even if some a rather more doorstopperish than others.

I used the example of Tolkien publishing additional books covering lesser characters or events.

Given that all Tolkien's books were standalones, and he never wrote anything akin to this, that is not really a valid example.

I also understand sarcasm. But unfortunately your example wasn’t sarcasm, it was simply counter-productive to the point you were trying to get across.

No, it was sarcasm. And if you're permitted to use an example of a series of standalone works set in the same world to compare with a series like this, surely I can too?

 

On a side note, I also differ with your opinion about having no problems with him not being able to kill off characters. I look forward to maybe debating this one with you as well as I do like a good debate. Your quote and response:

 

“You've seen the problem he has with killing off his characters and letting them stay dead.”

“No problem at all.”

 

Authors (fantasy authors in particular) run the risk of having some of the suspense taken from their work if the reader begins to suspect that characters will always be safe. George R R Martin is a good example of where no character is safe (forget for the moment any other arguments on the pros and cons of Martin – just focus for a minute on this one particular issue). David Eddings (read him when I was much younger) had a similar problem to Jordan. If, as a reader you are in too much of a comfort zone with your security about characters surviving, it is hard to build suspense when they are written into dangerous situations. So I differ to you on having no problem with killing off characters (I do admit that some of ideas for bringing characters back to life are neat though, but overall the series has suffered from a growing belief that characters are too safe.

But the characters are not always safe. There are more, and frequently better, ways of imperilling your characters than to threaten to kill them off, and better ways to maintain tension over what will happen. Characters are there for a purpose. It might be thematic, plot related, comic relief, but they are there for a reason. If a character has a purpose that takes them through one book, and then their continued presence is not helpful, perhaps even harmful, get rid of them. Kill them, imprison them, exile them, there are plenty of options. Maybe just don't show them for a bit - many characters have missed books, including Mat and Perrin. When characters need to die, when their purpose is fulfilled, then they can be killed - Pedron Niall, Eamon Valda, Geofram Bornhald, Jaichim Carridin (does RJ have a thing for killing Whitecloaks? Also, while all these examples are of antagonists, there are good guys who have died). All died, all stayed dead. You might argue that these are all minor characters, that there have been none of major characters, which is because the main players all still have a role to fulfill. That doesn't make them safe, it just means they won't die. Some examples - Rand loses a hand, and is in pain through the two unhealing wounds in his side; Perrin lost his entire family; Nynaeve knows Lan slept with Myrelle; Elayne got a lot of people killed with a foolish plan. You kill someone off, that's it. End of story. You drive him mad, maim him, you still have a story. Which has the potential to be far more interesting. No doubt there will be some deaths in the remaining books, possibly even in main characters. After all, he won't need them any more, they can fulfill their functions, end their stories. Mat will survive, because he had a new chapter of his story planned. Egwene? Nynaeave? For all we know, they could be on the chopping block, as well as any number of others. While they still have a role to fulfill, we know they will survive what mortal peril they appear to be in, but that doesn't mean they will be able to pass through hell and come out unscathed. Just that they will come out.

 

Ludmian, if I want to talk about the merits of an argument about George R R Martin stretching his series, I will do it on a Martin fan site.

Why not here? After all topics always go off topic, and it would hardly hurt to talk about another fine series. Wouldn't be the first time, either.

 

I can't fully agree with you on it not being a planned 6 book series. I have by no means read everything to do with WOT, but there is a lot of info on the web (see some of my examples in earlier posts) that do say it was originally planned and sold as a 6 book series.

I have never seen a quote from RJ saying it was originally planned as a six book series. Here, for example, he says "In the beginning, I truly thought it was going to be four or five books. When I finished 'The Eye of the World,' I thought I had a good chance of doing it in six." Note the "four or five", an uncertainty from the very beginning about how many it would be, a lack of firm commitment to a number of books. Also, he backs up my earlier statements about only getting it six by rewriting the entire series from book 1. In another interview he claims "I thought 'The Wheel of Time' was going to be five or six books." He goes on to say: "I didn't think they'd be this long. I was doing this like a historical novel, but I had more things to explain, things not readily apparent. In a normal historical novel, you can simply let some things go by because the reader of historical fiction knows these, or has the concept of them. But this is not the medieval period, not a fantasy with knights in shining armor. If you want to imagine what the period is, imagine it as the late 17th century without gunpowder. I had to do more explaining about cultural details, and that meant things got bigger than I had intended." Right from the start he was wrongfooted, because of worldbuilding, and how much space that took up in the books. Further comments (found here: http://www.wotmania.com/wotmessageboard2showmessage.asp?MessageID=99683) further support this: "In the beginning I really thought I could do it in four or five books. By the end of the third I knew there wasn't a chance of finishing the story in six books, which led to confusion among fans." "It wasn't a matter of the story growing or expanding, but rather that I miscalculated how long it would take to get from the beginning to the end." "I have spent 18 years of my life on this, and I would like to finish it. I thought I was signing up for a 10K run. I knew it was not a stroll in the park. I knew I was doing something that was going to be longer than usual. But when I first started I thought that 'longer than usual' meant five or six books. I honestly thought I would finish it in five." "In fact, book one was originally supposed to encapsulate the events from The Eye of the World and The Great Hunt in one 600-700 page volume, "but that didn't happen."" Something else, which will perhaps clear up some confusion, was this: "When he was negotiating a contract with Tom Doherty, he told Tom that he didn't know how long the series would be, but that he did know the ending. Jordan says that writers seldom get contracts under those circumstances, but Tom signed him one because he like Jordan's writing. The contract was for 6 books." Even when he was negotiating his contract, he didn't know how long it would be, but he signed a contract for six books.

 

thanks to everyone that hijacked my thread. this was meant to be a thread discussing the names of the last 3 books. i'd just like to say to you all grow the f*** up.

Threads go off topic. Deal with it.

 

*shrugs* You may discuss whether apples can rival oranges if you wish, of course.

Oranges are better, of course. Apples suck.

 

For the record, i have not read past book 2, so I cannot really comment on whether he is stringing it out (I can't provide a personal opinion on whether the writing has declined, secondary characters have been given too much time, unnecessary tangents have been taken, etc.)

I'm pretty sure when you get to AFFC, you won't like it.

 

Allow me to again post the quote from Tom Doherty:

 

From http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TrilogyCreep:

 

"At World Con 2008 Tom Doherty of Tor Books finally put this long-standing rumour to rest: it was originally planned to be six books when Robert Jordan proposed the series to him in 1984, before he even started writing the first book."

As I have already told you, tvtropes.org is not a reliable source of information. Of entertainment, I will grant you, but they are not even as rigorous as wikipedia. That is not a direct quote from Tom Doherty. It is a quote from someone who heard something from Tom Doherty, at best, perhaps it has passed through further hands since. I think I have provided enough evidence to lay the six books argument to rest. Now, I think a more accurate quote would be this: "In 1984, Jim came to Tom and said, “I’ve got a great idea for an epic fantasy, and it’s going to be 6 books.”", found here:http://peterahlstrom.blogspot.com/2008/08/rolling-up-wheel-of-time-panel.html, but the author of that blog does note that "The following is a somewhat cleaned up semi-stream-of-consciousness reconstruction of the panel from the copious notes I took throughout.", and thus there exists the possibility of slight distortions. I believe that is the original source of the quote.

 

This last quote is the crux of my argument. It isn't a firm answer. It allowed him to string it out without being pinned down to naming how many. The firm response didn't come out to he started talking about one more book for AMOL (sadly now 3).

But, as the crux of your argument, it no more supports you than it does other interpretations, such as a genuine underestimation of how long it would take. Given that he has elsewhere said this was a problem it is more likely than your wholly unsupported opinion. No facts support you, they do contradict you though. Wheel of Time was not planned to be six books, or any specific number of books. It was always planned to be as long as it needed to be, without artificial limits on the number of books, although in the early days RJ did underestimate the number of books it would require, and so got into the habit of not giving hard and fast numbers, prefering to maintain a degree of flexibility.

[Eighty89]

Ludmian and Mr Ares: I appreciate your passion in arguing your point of views in what is obviously something you are both passionate about and committed to.

 

Just thinking about it, i think the main differences between our different opinions on this matter can be summed up by the following quotes from your last post each:

 

"And his refusal to give a definite number of books has a quite reasonable explanation that I mentioned earlier."

 

and:

 

"If you say "not sure how many more, but about three", then you give yourself plenty of wriggle room."

 

We simply differ on our interpretations of this (we've all covered plenty of pages on our reasoning).

 

I guess part of my recent discontent was based upon some excitement about the prospect of the final book and scene coming out sometime this year (like I said I hadn't checked for an update for a few months and was terribly disappointed with the news about 3 more books and probably 2+ more years.

 

You asked for some other people's opinions on what I have been trying to convey, please find the following from a quick search. Please can I clarify these by saying that there is plenty of good stuff around them, even by the posters whose parts of quotes i have pasted were negative (check out the links for the full picture). Like me, many others have taken huge enjoyment in WOT but are also frustrated by certain parts (especially the angle i have been writing about in my past posts on this thread). And like one poster below said, that frustration is probably more keen because of RJ's quality as an author when he is on his game and because of how good WOT is when it is on its game. Check out the comments to get a feel for what and why it frustrates people. I guess the posters below share some of my frustration on this element of the overall series. Like i said in an earlier post, sometimes less can be more, but it is a fine line. Anyway, onwards and upwards. Still can't wait for the last 3 books to come out so i can read what happens. Good luck to Brandon in putting out a cracking read. If nothing else, at least this issue spurred me to register at Dragonmount.

 

http://weread.com/book/0812513738/The+Shadow+Rising+(The+Wheel+of+Time,+Book+4)/FBK-0812513738_-1 (see post from Curt)

 

"The Shadow Rising is the book that changed WOT from a series that could easily have been finished in five books to a series that may never end."

 

http://www.amazon.com/Winters-Heart-Wheel-Time-Book/dp/0312864256

 

"The prologue is over 70 pgs long. Most of it contains worthless story filler without much happening."

 

and

 

"RJ has created a rich fantasy world with some great characters and background history, but for all that potential... the writer must keep his audience encaptivated and loyal. After enduring the declining quality of his story writing, it scares me to realize that I'm losing my emotional attachment to the story and its characters. It's no longer a series that I can confidently recommend to my friends and colleagues, knowing that a new reader will find the WoT deteoriate as an engrossing story as they surpass book 5. Why are many once loyal fans of the WoT starting to have serious doubts, some of them leaving the series behind only to pick up another fantasy author's work? It's really a rhetorical question. Some die-hard fans will continue to exalt RJ's work without unbiased eyes. 2 years later, I'll continue to read his work simply for the sake of intellectual curiosity to the story. Meanwhile, I search for other authors who've been "overshadowed" by Jordan's fame (slowly turning to infamy) and publicity, but who've been given genuine praise for their writing in the fantasy genre."

 

and

 

"Let's be honest - if you have read the Wheel of Time to this point, you'll read it to the end no matter how bad the future installments are. Unfortunately, Robert Jordan realizes this too. Everything in this book and the last two could have been condensed into one, excellent book of the same quality as "The Shadow Rising" or "The Fires of Heaven". But why charge readers for one book, when you can charge them for three?"

 

and

 

"With that said, I should emphasize that I only criticize this book because it was written by an author of Robert Jordan's caliber. If this were from some minor author, I would be raving about it and recommending it to my friends. But we all know Jordan can do better."

 

and

 

"I, too, have been a reader and rereader of this series since it began a generation ago. This latest book was, AGAIN, disappointing. Jordan and Tor should be concerned, too many people are giving this series up for dead.

Can you remember what those first books were like? Fleeing at breakneck speed from Shadowspawn? The fear? The wonder at this brilliant world, the histories, the cultures, the laws of nature and magic? The amazing women and men? The innocence of the good and the black heart of the evil? Those books made your heart pump! And the characters - just as that first original cover review stated so long ago - seem like old friends.

 

What happened?

 

Slow, gradual, decent into mediocrity.

 

The last several books have been, as many other reviewers have written, fluff. Filler. Spotted with great scenes, but generally shallow and getting shallower. We want to get into it! But at every turn Jordan forces a sigh of agony or a roll of eyes from his readers, by repeating the same descriptive passages, or repeating the same bickering between characters, or repeating the same tired thought threads (Faile...likes to be shouted at...?). Aarrgg! Same thing again! We know already!!

 

Put some focus into it. Rand and his tragic love square(trapezoid?)? Soap opera? Didn't have to be. Mat as Queens plaything? Overly obnoxious? Didn't have to be. Focus, follow the arc, and move on. Our characters becoming less and less important and powerful? Fine, just tie it together and move forward. New characters, new background, new threads? Fine, but remember the story. Remember why we all came to the table in the first place. Tell the story! Put your back into it man!

 

Its not too late for this series. Just give us something to cheer for! Cut out the filler, the petty, the repetitous. Give us intrigue! Give us glory! Give us a 300 page battle for Tar Valon! Give us love! Give us Moraine back from the Aelfinn to save the day as the Blight spills shadow over the lands! Give us peril! Aei Sedai at the gates of The Dark Ones prison! Adventure! Passion! Mystery! SOMETHING!!

 

50 pages at the end of 600 is not putting your back into it.

 

He needs to stand up to his publisher and swallow his ego. Jordan began as the best voice in fantasy we had seen in ages, but like so many greats before him, has been broken under the weight and fame of this series.

 

But its not too late...just one powerful book is all we need. It'll feel good to write it. He'll see how satisfying it is. And his numbers will stop dropping off so sharply. Reading bad reviews from the industry as well as fans has got to get old."

 

(The one above articulates a lot of my feelings better than i have been able to in lots of my posts)

 

http://volokh.com/posts/1190145356.shtml

 

"Unfortunately, as his Wheel of Time series grew, it seemed that he took more and more time to do less and less in the books. And more and more it seemed he was milking his successful cash cow by extending it with epic quantities of filler."

 

 

I'm curious as to what you think about these?? Like i said it doesn't come from hate of WOT or RJ, just a frustration that it really had a chance to be right up there on the top shelf but IMHO just fell back a bit due to a bit of overindulgence (some of you love the extra detail) in the art (in my view an ediitor or someone similar should keep the artist on track in this respect) and probably some pushing from the publishers.

 

A quick comment about the accusation of "attacking" RJ. I'm not attacking him (a bit of a strong term), but i am criticising an element of his series. On many other threads and topics i would wax lyrical about him. But please tell me if i am deluding myself, this is a forum isn't it??. One where people can express their views and feelings on different thread topics. It's not a love fest (or shouldn't be if it's a true forum). People will have criticisms about artists. It is not attacking. As long as i am not personally rude or vulgar to him, i am not "attacking" him by posting a criticism. The whole idea of this site is to inspire debate and talk isn't it???

 

And as for that elusive answer you were after, no, it is not just 6 to 14 that i would consider stretching. But my feeling is that each author / series has to be judged (and a lot of it is personal feeling / instinct) on other factors too (eg: declining quality, padding, too great a focus on minor events, etc, etc). In relation to Martin, (even though i can't give a firm answer because i haven't read far enough) if his books fell into the categories listed above and he extended the series beyond what he originally proposed, then yes, he would probably be milking it too.

 

Look forward to your response (still haven't played around with that quote pasting but will endeavour to some time).

 

ps: for the record i haven't read the last 2 books in the series (stopped after WH and won't read anymore until the last book is published). But most reviews seem to suggest that Knife of Dreams was a step back in the right direction. So i still have a lot to look forward to as i will have five WOT books to discover at some point.

[Vambram]

Well, once again Eighty89 posts attacks against RJ's ability as an author, but this time he finds other critics attacking RJ and the WOT series to attempt to prove that he is right. How nice. [sarcasm]

[Bob T Dwarf]

He's not "attempting to prove he's right."  He's merely expressing his own opinion about the quality of the series.  And, pointing out that many others hold similar opinions.

 

Any author is entitled to tell the story he wants to relate.  But, that may not be the story that readers want to hear.  That's where "publishing" comes in.  The story the reader eventually gets to see is a pastiche of what the author wanted to tell, what the publisher was willing to buy, what the editor was willing to approve, and what the bookseller was willing to stock.

 

Partly as a result of increasingly critical reviews of the Wheel of Time series, and the resulting falloff in sales, it seems that booksellers are no longer nearly as willing to stock huge, epic-sized volumes.  Because his publisher and editor were both willing to allow Jordan to blather on and on rather than focus and get to the point, Sanderson is now left with more heavy lifting in order to wrap up the series than can be accomplished within the size of what booksellers are now willing to stock.

 

The good news is that Sanderson's willing to do that heavy lifting.  Sufficiently dedicated that he's pushing back some of his own projects in order to get it done in a timely manner.

 

What emerges from that won't be exactly the set of words that Jordan would have produced, but it will contain the ending he'd envisioned from the start.  At this point in the overly long process that it's taken us to get here, that's about the best we can hope for.

 

Regardless of all of that, literary criticism is not any kind of personal attack on the author.  What some of us are trying to do here is discuss the story, not the person.  And, for some of us, the story suffers from an excess of padding.

[Ludmian]

Ludmian and Mr Ares: I appreciate your passion in arguing your point of views in what is obviously something you are both passionate about and committed to.

 

Just thinking about it, i think the main differences between our different opinions on this matter can be summed up by the following quotes from your last post each:

 

"And his refusal to give a definite number of books has a quite reasonable explanation that I mentioned earlier."

 

and:

 

"If you say "not sure how many more, but about three", then you give yourself plenty of wriggle room."

 

We simply differ on our interpretations of this (we've all covered plenty of pages on our reasoning).

 

Yes, our interpretations differ. For some reason you think that RJ was a greedy evil cowardly liar. Everything RJ said or did you interpret according to your belief. I can't think of anything RJ could have possibly said or done that you couldn't have interpreted this way. If someone had found a quote from 1984 where RJ says he's planning to write a 14-book series, you would say that it supports your opinion and RJ was planning to stretch the series from the very beginning.

 

Obviously, I don't agree with your interpretation of RJ as a person. I see no reason why I shouldn't take what he says about writing the series at face value. If he says that he will need at least three books to finish the series it means that he doesn't actually know how long it will take him to finish the series, but is certain he can't do this in less than three books. If he says in the beginning he didn't know how many books WoT will be, it means he really didn't know it. My belief, among other things, is based on some common sense that tells me that in many cases it's impossible to accurately predict how many words it will take you to write something. Your belief, among other things, is based on an erroneous assumption that it's always possible to make such predictions. Ok, next time you write a post try to set a goal to write a post that will be neither significantly longer nor significantly shorter than a definite number of words. See how easy it will be for you. After that think of the fact that RJ was writing an epic with 2000 characters, not a 100-word reply to someone's post.

 

 

I guess part of my recent discontent was based upon some excitement about the prospect of the final book and scene coming out sometime this year (like I said I hadn't checked for an update for a few months and was terribly disappointed with the news about 3 more books and probably 2+ more years.

 

The decision to split AMoL into three novels did stir some controversy here. A couple of threads on this very board were even closed. You can look for them if you want. I'd say it's a rather interesting read. Now the split is being discussed on The Gathering Storm board. Now Kathana is watching it over regularly, so I hope the thread will neither be closed for the sole purpose of saving someone's reputation, like the first one, nor will be allowed to go to the point when it becomes completely ugly and is begging to be closed, like the second one.

 

 

 

You asked for some other people's opinions on what I have been trying to convey, please find the following from a quick search.

 

Don't remember when I asked for it. I simply noted that if you want to use quotes from other people, you might have tried to find quotes whose authors don't think insulting RJ somehow makes them look cool.

 

As for the quotes themselves, I hope you don't think anybody here is unaware that such criticism exists. It all has been discussed to death here, at Amazon, and in many other places. What can be said about them, basically boils down to two things:

 

It's impossible to please all the people all the time

 

and

 

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

 

Some people think that the series "degraded" starting from book 4, some think it started to degrade from book 5, 6, 7 or 8. There are people (I'm among them) who like the series as a whole, not just the first X books. When I read this

 

Give us a 300 page battle for Tar Valon!

 

I thought "Pleeeeeaaaaase! Noooooooooooo!" I guess there were people who had a similar reaction. I personally would prefer 300 pages spent in the Tower of Ghenjei. But on the other hand there are people who really wouldn't mind a 300-page battle and are, probably, not that curious about the Tower of Ghenjei. Whom the author should listen to? The answer is: noone. An author always knows better how to tell his own story, what to include and what not to include. If writers tried to be good for everyone, no one would be able to write anything. As George RR Martin once said, "Art is not democracy". A writer should not conduct opinion polls to decide if he should kill off more characters or give more (or less) detail. I'm amazed at the arrogance of people who think they know better than RJ how RJ's story should be told and propose to cut it down to 8, 6 or any other number of books. In case a side observer's opinion was needed RJ had one of the best editors in publishing business. Again, it's amazing how some people think they know more about writing RJ's story than RJ and more about editing it than Harriet.

 

 

But most reviews seem to suggest that Knife of Dreams was a step back in the right direction.

 

The series has always been moving in the right direction, this direction being the last scene RJ had in mind for the last 30 years of his life.

 

Partly as a result of increasingly critical reviews of the Wheel of Time series, and the resulting falloff in sales, it seems that booksellers are no longer nearly as willing to stock huge, epic-sized volumes.

 

This sentence contains at least three presuppositions that, IMHO, require an additional proof, namely

 

1) there has been a falloff in sales of WoT,

 

2) bookshops are unwilling to store epic-sized volumes,

 

3) they are unwilling to do this because of the criticism WoT recieves and the resulting decline in the sales of WoT.

 

Would you, please, prove these statements?

 

Because his publisher and editor were both willing to allow Jordan to blather on and on rather than focus and get to the point,

 

They did the best thing they could have possibly done for him as a writer.

 

Sanderson is now left with more heavy lifting in order to wrap up the series than can be accomplished within the size of what booksellers are now willing to stock.

 

The reasons for splitting AMoL is still something open to debate. As has been shown many times, Tor's explanations can't stand even the slightest examination.

 

 

Regardless of all of that, literary criticism is not any kind of personal attack on the author. 

 

Most of Eighty89's posts had more to do with personal attacks than with "literary criticism".

 

What some of us are trying to do here is discuss the story, not the person.

 

 

When Eighty89 tried to convince others that RJ was a greedy cowardly liar it surely had a lot to do with discussing the story. Is that your idea of "literary criticism"?

 

And, for some of us, the story suffers from an excess of padding.

 

For some of "us" it doesn't.

[Eighty89]

I think i figured out the quote thing. Probably there are a few more features i could get my head around, but hey, learn something new every day!

 

Quote

And, for some of us, the story suffers from an excess of padding.

 

For some of "us" it doesn't.

 

I think you have managed to sum up the two opposing views again pretty succinctly with the two sentences above. Just different views on the art.

 

I still don't think criticising how he has gone about his series and the quality or lack thereof is attacking. Don't know why it offends you so much? It's like you are all surprised and offended someone has a different opinion to you. I must be "attacking" you and you must be "attacking" me (due to our criticisms of each other's beliefs) if you apply your logic. And i don't believe that is so. We are just all enjoying the debate (at least i hope so) of trying to get our points across.

 

Every day people provide opinions of artists, musicians, sportspeople, writers, filmakers, etc. Many of them like the artist or media they are writing about but use forums or review sites to talk about areas they don't like or think could have been done better / differently. No biggy. It's not attacking. It's called a critical opinion (critical opinion meaning an assessment - either positive, neutral, or negative).

 

I'll use an example. Some of my favourite albums have dud tracks or tracks with good bits but plenty of overindulgence (eg: long solos, long ambient bits, etc, etc). Now, some listeners may love these bits (god knows i dig lots of songs or parts of songs that others wouldn't care for). The point is if a musical artist had in his head a track list of cracking songs that he could have released in one fantastic album, but chose to spread these tracks over 3-4 albums with the remainder as stuff of lesser quality, then i am going to lament that decision and wish i could have just bought the one top notch album to get all the songs i love. IMHO i would prefer the one good album to the 3 with good bits and bad bits, if you get my drift. And i'm damn well going to post my opinion about it on review sites and forums. And that is not attacking. Remember, it comes down to interpretation of whether there are bad songs (some people might love every single track on the 3 albums) and if you think it would have been a better overall product without the bad songs.

 

So the above example all comes down to what the individual person thinks about the filler. In the WOT case, it is a bit more complex because it comes down to whether or not you asrcibe to a "milking" belief (btw - that doesn't make him a cowardly liar - don't know why Ludmian and Mr Ares and Vambram always jump to such over the top interpretations (they are all your words, not mine) - but greedy does play a factor if you asrcibe to my view. Now let me clarify that by saying that i think the publishers take the lion share of the greediness. As for RJ, i believe it probably comes down to the success allowing him to overindulge a bit too much (IMHO) in his art, but hey, i'm sure it was a great meal ticket too) or the "I love all of it" view.

 

Remember, a writer (whether he likes it or not) has some responsibility to a lot of parties if he wants to keep performing his art. These include (Bob T Dwarf covered this as well) publishers, editors, book stockers, and fans. They all have their focus on what they want and they will all be vocal in campaiging the writer to meet their needs as a priority. Fans are probably the most vocal of the lot. And there is such a breadth of different opinions. A writer must strike a balance between satisfying himself in the art he/she is creating, but balancing that against something poeple will be happy with and continue to buy / publish / stock, etc so he/she can continue making their art. Sometimes, they will push this a bit far and people will jump up and down. And it is their god given right to do so! The power of the consumer in other words. And i intend to jump up and down when i feel strongly enough about something! (a view i'm sure you can asribe to as well - we are just jumping up and down in different directions).

 

Let me now try to summarise my rambling thoughts and try to simplify our two views (feel free to shoot me down if you disagree - i'm definitely interested in your response).

 

Your (and many others) view: have taken most of the author's / publishers, etc comments at face value and are happy with all or almost all of the product and feel it is all a natural part of his original vision.

 

My (and many others) view: love the concept and fell in love with the story. Feel that the latter half has drifted a bit and the "good stuff" doesn't feature enough. Have taken the cynical view that the author's / publisher's, etc comments have been a bit misleading (wriggle room as - was it Mr Ares?? - used) and there has been some greed and some overindulgence that has impacted upon our overall experience of the product due to too much padding, tangents, focus on minor events / characters, early predictions on number of books, sliding predictions as the series progressed etc (please note the term too much - i like a detailed series too but it just tipped over a bit too much).

 

In the ball park??? You put 2 and 2 together to get 3. I put 2 and 2 together and got 5. The true answer is probably (inevitably) somewhere in the middle.

[Mr Ares]

"The Shadow Rising is the book that changed WOT from a series that could easily have been finished in five books to a series that may never end."

What happened in TSR was part of the original plan, and much of it followed from earlier books. Hunting the BA? Fain trying to hurt Rand? Rand and the Aiel? He who comes with the dawn? All set up before. TSR opened up the world, but did so in a way that was always going to happen.

 

"The prologue is over 70 pgs long. Most of it contains worthless story filler without much happening."

Length of prologue is irrelevant, whether or not the contents of said prologue are worthless filler is a matter of opinion. Not constructive.

 

Jordan and Tor should be concerned, too many people are giving this series up for dead.

But they're not. It is still one of the most popular fantasy series going. Tor and RJ have nothing to be worried about.

Our characters becoming less and less important and powerful?

Delusion. They become more so.

Fine, but remember the story. Tell the story!

He does and he is.

Give us intrigue!

He does.

Give us a 300 page battle for Tar Valon!

No, give us as many pages as it requires.

 

I'm curious as to what you think about these?

Written by idiots.

(eg: declining quality, padding, too great a focus on minor events, etc, etc). In relation to Martin, (even though i can't give a firm answer because i haven't read far enough) if his books fell into the categories listed above and he extended the series beyond what he originally proposed, then yes, he would probably be milking it too.

He originally proposed a trilogy. It has certainly grown. Many see a decline in quality in AFFC. While it is true that it is a step down from the giddy heights of ASoS, it is still a book that holds its own very well against the rest of the series. There is an increased focus on more minor characters and events. This is not a bad thing. These people, in ASoIaF and WoT, have roles to fulfill. Giving sufficient time to their characters and subplots is a good thing. Whether they are padded or not is arguable. Some would say so. It is also arguable if RJ's books are, and what is padding and what isn't. I think there is a pretty good chance you will dislike the fourth book.

 

Partly as a result of increasingly critical reviews of the Wheel of Time series' date=' and the resulting falloff in sales, it seems that booksellers are no longer nearly as willing to stock huge, epic-sized volumes.[/quote']That would be the drop off in sales from not-a-#1-bestseller to #1 bestseller status, would it? The most heavily criticised period for the series is the period when it was topping the charts in a way that earlier volumes didn't. Despite critical reviews, people still buy these books in large numbers. Now, fantasy is, for the most part, a niche product. WoT is a mainstream success. So while shops are willing to give over space to a guaranteed money spinner like WoT, a less commercially successful series such as Mistborn or Prince of Nothing might end up losing out. They take up space on shelves that could fit several smaller books - and several smaller books for the same price gives the opportunity for greater sales, in what is already a niche market. That is the reason for bookshops to be unhappy with fantasy publishers. In cases like WoT or ASoIaF or others, they are willing to give them space because they will sell.

 

As for padding, what do you consider padding?

[Eighty89]

You make some good points Mr Ares. Fantasy is indeed a niche market and can never be judged on the conventions of most other genres.

 

I got a little sidetracked from my initial post which was an instantaneous reaction to having in my head one last book due sometime this year (my anticipation was building up on that expectation) to suddenly (belately for me as news had been out for a while) finding out there were going to be 3 more books and 2+ more year's wait. That was the main gripe (i got sidetracked on tangents responding to fellow posters and ended up talking about other gripes in the series (lucky i'm not being paid for my work). A couple of weeks later i admit i still feel a bit hard done by as a consumer. I know they have published their reasoning but i still feel it should have been fitted into 2 books max. I know books can blow out (look at Storm of Swords 1+2 and To Green Angel Tower (Seige and Storm)? Still can't shake the feeling of being a bit hard done by as a consumer. 2000 pages can be fitted into 2 books (big books i know, but the precedent has been set and they will indeed sell enough to cover their costs - both publishers and book stockers). And if it blows out above 2000 pages, that's a hard one to judge before the event. I would argue that the story (despite how many loose threads were left) should still be able to be wrapped up well inside 2000 pages (and thus 2 books) but if it runs to 2500 and the quality and pace is there then i will eat my words.

 

As for the question of padding, it is a hard one to describe as it is purely subjective and individual. It is like a person trying to describe to somebody else why a sound is tinny to their ear when to that other person they find it blissful.

 

But here gos. Padding is:

- where description tips over into over description.

 

- repetition of description, character traits, events.

 

- minor characters and events take too much percentage of the story.

 

- the story branches off from the main arc for too much of the story (this is very subjective as many love this type of detail in broadening the WOT world. I personally would rather some of it included in follow up volmes and let the main arc have its limelight in a more tightly plotted main series (definitely a personal opinion). It can also be argued, i guess, how much of this was originally conceived and how much was tacked on as a way to generate more material for the series and stretch out the series (if you ascribe to that view)). Remember, i believe this was overindulgence on RJ's behalf as (once the poularity of WOT became recognised) he totally lost himself in all the munitia of his world while the publishers were happy for more books to sell with the WOT brand.

 

- a drop of in emotional impact. Sometimes giving someone too much of something just takes the edge off the enotional impact (similar to a movie that was strung out too long with unnecessary or long scenes (you just feel the same or better result could have been achieved by cutting 30 mins off the film - filmakers don't get paid by the minute either).

 

- useless or unproductive speech.

 

- a slowing of pace.

 

With RJ, i experienced some of these things from book 1. Personally i felt the trip from the two rivers to the blight was a bit overlong (again, my humble opinion). And the endless to-ing and fro-ing from Cairhein to Andor in the middle books. And the description of locations and people's dress. Some love all of it, i began to be bogged down by it. It's a fine line between getting the amount of this right. Fantasy readers are generally a lot more willing to read this type of stuff than most. Sometimes i felt like yelling at the book "just get on with the story". This happens at some stage during most fantasy stories. Just part of the genre. Character descriptions (eg Nynaeve pulling her brad, folding arms under bosom, etc) just go too much. I like little quirks in my characters just like anyone but too much becomes saturation and what was a nice distinguishing feature becomes annoying. By this stage it was redundent and an editor should have cut it and thus it is padding. So, as you see, there were a few frustrations from the start (what author is perfect??) but i feel these things just became more prevalent as the series went on.

 

The good part is their is so much good stuff smothered in with this padding. So many fresh ideas and wonderful creations and brilliantly written scenes. Funnily enough i actually though Path of Daggers was really good. A lot of people writing on reveiws were unhappy with the "lack of anything happening" in this book, but i enjoyed this one a lot. For me, Winters Heart was really slow except for certain brief scenes and the ending. Also, there are plenty of brilliant scenes scattered throughout the latter books as well as the padding.

 

Personally, i just wish this good stuff had had more percentage of the story and some of the other stuff, less inspiring storylines and events, and overdescription had been sloughed from the overall product. Hence, why, in my view, less could have been more and the series might well have been even better if it had been condensed into 6-7 books, with some supplementary follow ups.

 

Hope that answered your question.

 

[Mr Ares]

Padding is:

- where description tips over into over description.

 

- repetition of description, character traits, events.

While these are present, they are not to such an extent that one could reduce the number of books by eliminating them.

 

- minor characters and events take too much percentage of the story.

How much is too much? If there is a reason for the amount of screen time they receive, then it isn't padding.

 

- the story branches off from the main arc for too much of the story (this is very subjective as many love this type of detail in broadening the WOT world. I personally would rather some of it included in follow up volmes and let the main arc have its limelight in a more tightly plotted main series (definitely a personal opinion).

This branching is necessary to the main story, so it is hardly padding. These things are part of the plot, and can't just be left for some later follow up story. Take the BA hunters in the Tower for example: Egwene is now inside the WT so these threads are likely to link up. You need to establish the BA hunt, the hunters, the progress they make, and so on. Which plot threads could be excised completely? Not many, and you wouldn't save a lot of space by doing so. Which could be trimmed down? Something like Valan Luca's circus in FoH, perhaps? But you still won't save enough space. Six books is ridiculous.

 

- a drop of in emotional impact.

That might be a result of padding, but it isn't padding itself.

 

- useless or unproductive speech.

What do you consider to be useless or unproductive?

 

- a slowing of pace.

By having more and more events take place in a smaller and smaller period of time. In the later books, he has more plot threads to move forward than in the earlier books, so this is inevitable.

 

Personally i felt the trip from the two rivers to the blight was a bit overlong (again, my humble opinion).

So what do you feel should be cut?

And the endless to-ing and fro-ing from Cairhein to Andor in the middle books.

Same question.

(what author is perfect??)

Dostoyevsky?

[Elgee]

(what author is perfect??)

 

Dostoyevsky?

 

Ha ... ha?? Even reading him in Russian was torturous  :P