Why do people hate the Wheel of Time?

[Myrenna]

The pillow friends generally exist only in the Tower, a place where men are loath to go and many of the women actively prevented from seeing men. Most men fear Aes Sedai. I can think of two examples of pillow friends outside the Tower. There isn't an environment like the Tower for men, so why would male homosexual couples be mentioned?

[randsc]

We'll just have to agree to disagree about the definition of derivative. The one you're working with I would describe as plagiarism. I fell confident that if you surveyed the professors teaching those Creative Writing 101 classes you mention, virtually all would agree with me that tWoT is derivative.

 

From the mouth of the Creator (on his blog):

 

And for MJJ, as posted by DomA, pillow friends are not just good friends. Oh, they are that, too, but they also get hot and sweaty together and muss up the sheets something fierce. By the way, pillow friends is a term used in the White Tower. The same relationship between men or women elsewhere would be called something else, depending on the country.

 

and this:

 

On the large scale, the gender relationships in the Wheel grew from the very beginnings of the books, really. I recall seeing a paperback book back in the 70s, a fantasy novel about a young woman who wasn't allowed to become a magician of whatever sort it was because she was a woman. The notion struck me as interesting, since it was the first fantasy novel with that theme that I had ever seen, but what really stuck with me was this. That novel was a simple reflection of the then-current mundane world, but what about if it were men who were not allowed to become whatever it was? Now that would be an interesting twist, and unexpected. Why would that be, and how could it be enforced? As Harriet has often pointed out, many of the world's gender inequalities stem from superior male upper body strength. (To which I usually say, "Oh, dear! Isn't that awful and unfair!" While pulling off my shirt and flexing my biceps, to be sure.) From that genesis grew the division of the One Power into a male and a female half with the male half tainted, giving a reason why men not only would not be allowed to become Aes Sedai, as they were not then called, but must not be allowed even to channel, again as it was not then called. From that, and from the history that I was even then beginning to put together for this world, though I didn't realize it then, came the result of 3000+ plus years when men who can wield the ultimate power, the One Power, are to be feared and hated above all things, when the only safety from such men comes from the one stable center of political, and other, power for those 3000+ years, a female center of power. The view I then had was a world with a sort of gender equality. Not the matriarchy that some envision -- Far Madding is the only true matriarchy in the lot -- but gender equality as it might work out given various things that seem to be hard-wired into male and female brains. The result is what you see.

[GaseousAnomaly]

8+: The spankings are funny.

 

So in other words the white tower is a joke?

[Mrs. Cindy Gill]

i think people love what they love, regardless of what's considered good or bad. i love RJ, but there are some flaws that are hard to ignore, especially on audio, where it's hard to skip over things you don't like so much.

 

i could go the rest of my life without hearing/reading the word spanking again. the whole B&D theme sub theme is just really silly to to me. and i think it passed comic effect at the, say, hundredth, instance, and crossed over into naughty self indulgence. brandon sanderson made me a fan by changing the word to beating, and "cleaning it up" a bit.

 

and after a certain point, it really seemed like names and characters just started getting tossed in for no real reason. might they all link up into some monstrous solved puzzle in the end? maybe. does that change the fact that the human mind, even the really smart one, is not cut out to care about thousands of individual people? not really. i think there's a good reason most authors don't go above a few dozen central characters, and a few dozen minors for color and depth. and it's not lack of smartness. it's an understanding of how the reader's mind works, what holds its interest, and for how long.

 

the kind of people who hold dear to a series as sprawling and, for most of its existence, seemingly with no hope of ending, as this one is, are, i think, the kind of people who would enjoy a lifelong study of the bible. seriously, you change a few of the character names, and theoryland could pass for talmud.

 

i can't quite make the biblical leap, wherein every word is felt to have meaning, and where every sentence can be parsed to the most minute fragment in a search for deeper meaning. i'd feel too sacreligious. but. . . it's a close thing.

 

i wonder if too many readings make the flaws stand out more than they otherwise would?

[Hadilmir]

1. Oh, come on now. It's not derivative? There's not a Seven Samurai story here? (Hey look, it's even SEVEN characters who set out on the initial quest. Rand, Mat, Perrin, Nynaeve, Egwene, Moirane, and Lan) There's not an Ugly Duckling story?? (backwoods peasant turns out to be something much more) There aren't references to ancient myth? (I'm pretty sure the name, "Matrim Cauthon" is spelled O-D-I-N) There's not a pretty generic Quest story here?

 

It's very, very derivative. Again, I don't know that it is fair to criticize a genre work for being derivative, since genre fiction basically HAS to be derivative. But don't lets pretend the plot here is original. It's not.

 

2. As for the gender stuff, Jordan said many, many times that he didn't write a gender-reversed world, and that it was telling that people saw it as one. I take everything authors say in panel discussions or at book signing with several grains of salt, but he said it a lot. I really think he intended to write a balanced world. He failed.

 

3. I'm not a believer in the whole, "Jordan was obviously into spanking" thing, but it really does occur an awful lot. It's also amusing that there are female "pillow-friends" but not the male equivalent, but that's another story.

1. The fact that WoT is an amalgamation of so many allusions is one of the most important aspects of the series. RJ admitted he was blending as many sources as he could, not pushing for complete originality. It's like a giant "What if all the world's legends and myths all had common roots?" experiment. People who refuse to see this and think RJ just couldn't be original are sort of missing the point.

 

2. What? *Actually, you maybe be right here...

Q: Your societies seem to all place women in a very influential role. Any particular reason why you created so many matriarchies? Also, do you already have a solution for Rand's love triangle?

RJ: 1. 3000 years ago, the world was destroyed by men: specifically men, and for all of that time, every society has been afraid of any man who can channel. The result has to be greater power and influence for women. 2. Yes.

 

3. This is entirely due to where we see these events occuring. Notice Rand was not spanked by his captors before Dumai's Wells, he was flogged (Well, what do you call being whipped by air?). However, flogging is not suitable for educational systems such as the White Tower. Would you rather spank your child or whip them? Exactly. Where else do we see spanking? Once again, exactly. (Before anyone mentions it, Semirhage being spanked was because you obvious think less of someone when they're being spanked than when they're being flogged, and the point was to diminish her self-image)

[justincrb]

The pillow friends generally exist only in the Tower, a place where men are loath to go and many of the women actively prevented from seeing men. Most men fear Aes Sedai. I can think of two examples of pillow friends outside the Tower. There isn't an environment like the Tower for men, so why would male homosexual couples be mentioned?

 

 

Yeah that's how I feel about it too. I just don't think it's part of the story.

 

"Caprica" (the BSG spin off) for instance does some really great story telling involving male homosexuals without making the show about homosexuality (which is neat, being able to not even acknowledge stereotypes and just casually slip in that the most hardcore badass on the show happens to be gay is pretty exceptional).

 

WoT came two decades before that and already was pretty racy by having 3 female love interests agreeing to share Rand.

[Mrs. Cindy Gill]

we see spanking everywhere, with every society, with every age group, for any reason, along with many other allusions to B&D including how to tie the knots. some of the stuff could have been in pulp fiction. everyone from the youngest sheep shearer to the mightiest forsaken, from the mountains, to the prairies, to the oceans, white with foam, seems to have a thing for tying up and/or spanking each other.

 

there's no reason for that except that the author liked it that way.

 

i wish he could have kept a little of it to himself, but i think he enjoyed writing it that way too much to stop.

 

and i hope i can stop arguing about it now.

 

it's sillier still to try to convince someone to stop liking something they like. sorry.

[justincrb]

We'll just have to agree to disagree about the definition of derivative. The one your working with I would describe as plagiarism. I fell confident that if you surveyed the professors teaching those Creative Writing 101 classes you mention, virtually all would agree with me that tWoT is derivative.

 

Maybe we should. I agree that there are certainly parts of the WoT that are derivative, but basing characters and events on ancient myth are not those parts. I mentioned T.S. Eliot's The Wasteland before in a different thread about the game of Sha’rah (Jordan refers to the Fisher King, which in my opinion informs the rest of the series), would you call The Wasteland derivative? (I'm not comparing the two works, just asking your definition. Both heavily use other author's words and characters so it seems a valid question.) Calling a work derivative as opposed to an homage has essentially the same meaning but very different connotations. Most of the WoT I would say qualify as an homage, though there are parts that are questionable, mostly in the early books.

 

 

From the mouth of the Creator (on his blog):

 

And for MJJ, as posted by DomA, pillow friends are not just good friends. Oh, they are that, too, but they also get hot and sweaty together and muss up the sheets something fierce. By the way, pillow friends is a term used in the White Tower. The same relationship between men or women elsewhere would be called something else, depending on the country.

 

Good. At least Moraine got to have some fun.

 

From the mouth of the Creator (on his blog):

 

and this:

 

On the large scale, the gender relationships in the Wheel grew from the very beginnings of the books, really. I recall seeing a paperback book back in the 70s, a fantasy novel about a young woman who wasn't allowed to become a magician of whatever sort it was because she was a woman. The notion struck me as interesting, since it was the first fantasy novel with that theme that I had ever seen, but what really stuck with me was this. That novel was a simple reflection of the then-current mundane world, but what about if it were men who were not allowed to become whatever it was? Now that would be an interesting twist, and unexpected. Why would that be, and how could it be enforced? As Harriet has often pointed out, many of the world's gender inequalities stem from superior male upper body strength. (To which I usually say, "Oh, dear! Isn't that awful and unfair!" While pulling off my shirt and flexing my biceps, to be sure.) From that genesis grew the division of the One Power into a male and a female half with the male half tainted, giving a reason why men not only would not be allowed to become Aes Sedai, as they were not then called, but must not be allowed even to channel, again as it was not then called. From that, and from the history that I was even then beginning to put together for this world, though I didn't realize it then, came the result of 3000+ plus years when men who can wield the ultimate power, the One Power, are to be feared and hated above all things, when the only safety from such men comes from the one stable center of political, and other, power for those 3000+ years, a female center of power. The view I then had was a world with a sort of gender equality. Not the matriarchy that some envision -- Far Madding is the only true matriarchy in the lot -- but gender equality as it might work out given various things that seem to be hard-wired into male and female brains. The result is what you see.

 

I stand corrected.

[Mr Ares]

5. It isn't as gritty as current fashion dictates. The sort of "realistic" (quotes used advisedly) sex and violence that people have come to expect is absent. I don't think this is a terribly fair criticism for young adult novels (which, don't kid yourself, is what these are)

Young adult? A somewhat dubious claim - they are, after all, marketed to adults, and not the young adult market.

 

There's not a Seven Samurai story here? (Hey look, it's even SEVEN characters who set out on the initial quest. Rand, Mat, Perrin, Nynaeve, Egwene, Moirane, and Lan)

And Thom. That's eight.

 

2. As for the gender stuff, Jordan said many, many times that he didn't write a gender-reversed world, and that it was telling that people saw it as one. I take everything authors say in panel discussions or at book signing with several grains of salt, but he said it a lot. I really think he intended to write a balanced world. He failed.

The gender stuff would probably be better handled in another thread, but to describe the world as matriarchal isn't entirely at all accurate. In the quote you posted, RJ used the phrase "sort of" gender equality. It's certainly not a gender reversed world - men being in positions of power is treated as natural and common, it is not some sort of exception to the rule.

 

The pillow friends generally exist only in the Tower, a place where men are loath to go and many of the women actively prevented from seeing men. Most men fear Aes Sedai. I can think of two examples of pillow friends outside the Tower. There isn't an environment like the Tower for men, so why would male homosexual couples be mentioned?

We have examples of lesbian relationships outside the Tower. Why would we have references to male homosexual couples? Because they exist, surely that is reason enough to include some emntion of them.

 

we see spanking everywhere, with every society, with every age group, for any reason, along with many other allusions to B&D including how to tie the knots. some of the stuff could have been in pulp fiction. everyone from the youngest sheep shearer to the mightiest forsaken, from the mountains, to the prairies, to the oceans, white with foam, seems to have a thing for tying up and/or spanking each other.

 

there's no reason for that except that the author liked it that way.

Except the spankings in the series are never sexualised. There is an awful lot of swordplay in the series as well, should we start reading stuff into that? Or RJ's love of describing dresses?

[cgk84]

8+: The spankings are funny.

 

So in other words the white tower is a joke?

 

 

It has been for quite a number of books.

[Toy and Minion]

To the OP:

 

I think that Clegane answers your question.

[GaseousAnomaly]

8+: The spankings are funny.

 

So in other words the white tower is a joke?

 

 

It has been for quite a number of books.

 

I find it hard to believe they were basically puppet masters in Randland for the longest time.

[GaseousAnomaly]

Thinking a bit more about this. The thing that bugged me is that at some point instead of resolving plots RJ started creating more of them. It's kind of annoying when a book pretty much creates more plots without resolving any.

 

Just finished reading The Gathering Storm. Now that one was satisfying and had good rhythm.

[Mrs. Cindy Gill]

"Except the spankings in the series are never sexualised. There is an awful lot of swordplay in the series as well, should we start reading stuff into that? Or RJ's love of describing dresses?"

 

they're not sexualized because they're fetishized. i don't think it takes much reading into it when a good portion of text is devoted to the relative warmth of smacked bottoms, etc. and again, there's nothing wrong with that. they're his books. he wrote what he liked to write. but it can narrow the target audience a bit.

 

damn, sorry, arguing again.

 

i agree with GaseousAnomaly's first paragraph, and i think that's probably where a lot of resentment comes from.

 

and i apologize for my spelling.

[Beidomon]

Why don't people like the series? No one here is really the best person to answer that question, since presumably we all do like the series. But I'll give you a few reasons:

 

1. The aforementioned problems with recapping and getting 'lost' in the narrative. Both of which are valid criticisms;

 

2. Honestly, there are at least 4 bad books in the series. I'm sorry, but there really are. If a third to a quarter of a series is bad, how great is the series as a whole?;

 

3. Some of the description of the world, great at first, really does get repetitive and detailed to the point being self-parody on Jordan's part. By the time he has described the 500th dress in loving detail, or the 500th serving of flavored tea is sipped from the 500th cup of delicate Sea Folk porcelain, it gets to be a bit much;

 

...

 

Randac surmises most of the criticisms, and I agree with some of them. I really like WoT, enough that I'm doing a re-read now and posting here, but I'm not so in love with WoT that I'm blind to its flaws, as I think many Dragonmount denizens are.

 

I've just finished re-reading Books 1-4, and I'm experiencing joy, excitement, and regret. Regret because these books used to be so freaking good!!!! After Book 6, things took a serious nosedive. Actually, the decline was in the works starting with Elayne and Nynaeve's departure for Tanchico in Book 4, but Book 7 (Crown of Swords) is where a lot of the more boring plotlines took central stage. A few examples: Bowl of the Winds; Seafolk; Faile's Captivity (that went on for, what 4 books?!); seemingly ENDLESS Aes Sedai squabbling after the Tower schism. There's a select few who loved all that stuff, but not me, and not the vast majority of fantasy readers. It's not that I can't appreciate complexity - just don't bore me with the complexity!

 

Sanderson is doing as good a job as could be expected wrapping things up, and I'm encouraged that Jordan was able to outline and even draft portions of the final books before he died. Still, it makes me yearn for what might have been. If Books 7 - 10 had been shrunk to just one or two books, and some plotlines eliminated, might Jordan have finished the series before his passing? WoT could have been the greatest fantasy epic ever written.

[capuga]

Why don't people like the series? No one here is really the best person to answer that question, since presumably we all do like the series. But I'll give you a few reasons:

 

1. The aforementioned problems with recapping and getting 'lost' in the narrative. Both of which are valid criticisms;

 

2. Honestly, there are at least 4 bad books in the series. I'm sorry, but there really are. If a third to a quarter of a series is bad, how great is the series as a whole?;

 

3. Some of the description of the world, great at first, really does get repetitive and detailed to the point being self-parody on Jordan's part. By the time he has described the 500th dress in loving detail, or the 500th serving of flavored tea is sipped from the 500th cup of delicate Sea Folk porcelain, it gets to be a bit much;

 

...

 

Randac surmises most of the criticisms, and I agree with some of them. I really like WoT, enough that I'm doing a re-read now and posting here, but I'm not so in love with WoT that I'm blind to its flaws, as I think many Dragonmount denizens are.

 

I've just finished re-reading Books 1-4, and I'm experiencing joy, excitement, and regret. Regret because these books used to be so freaking good!!!! After Book 6, things took a serious nosedive. Actually, the decline was in the works starting with Elayne and Nynaeve's departure for Tanchico in Book 4, but Book 7 (Crown of Swords) is where a lot of the more boring plotlines took central stage. A few examples: Bowl of the Winds; Seafolk; Faile's Captivity (that went on for, what 4 books?!); seemingly ENDLESS Aes Sedai squabbling after the Tower schism. There's a select few who loved all that stuff, but not me, and not the vast majority of fantasy readers. It's not that I can't appreciate complexity - just don't bore me with the complexity!

 

Sanderson is doing as good a job as could be expected wrapping things up, and I'm encouraged that Jordan was able to outline and even draft portions of the final books before he died. Still, it makes me yearn for what might have been. If Books 7 - 10 had been shrunk to just one or two books, and some plotlines eliminated, might Jordan have finished the series before his passing? WoT could have been the greatest fantasy epic ever written.

 

Considering this is probably the best selling fantasy series in the world and each of the last 6 books has debuted as a NY Times #1 bestseller I would say that the vast majority of fantasy readers do enjoy the books. The problem is on the internet you only hear two sides. Those of us on fansites like these that love the series. And those that don't like the series and are very vocal in posting their dislike. Only the passionate one way or the other bother to post online. But each of those groups is just a small fraction of the readership. The vast majority of the readers mostly enjoy the series (or they wouldn't be reading book 13 in a huge series) but are not passionate enough to post online.

 

That being said, as a fan who absolutely loves these books, most of the criticisms mentioned in this thread are fairly valid.

[GaseousAnomaly]

 

Considering this is probably the best selling fantasy series in the world and each of the last 6 books has debuted as a NY Times #1 bestseller I would say that the vast majority of fantasy readers do enjoy the books. The problem is on the internet you only hear two sides. Those of us on fansites like these that love the series. And those that don't like the series and are very vocal in posting their dislike. Only the passionate one way or the other bother to post online. But each of those groups is just a small fraction of the readership. The vast majority of the readers mostly enjoy the series (or they wouldn't be reading book 13 in a huge series) but are not passionate enough to post online.

 

That being said, as a fan who absolutely loves these books, most of the criticisms mentioned in this thread are fairly valid.

Well of course as a whole the series is really good. But I would disagree in part with what you say. I like the series enough to have searched for more on the internet. But I also do search wonder about some things and sak my self why this or that is something I dont like about it and how it could be improved. So I'd say I might be in a third group. Like it a lot but recognize what I dont like. Beidomon mentioned the bowl of the wind. After that story arc was completed I really wondered what was the point. Whatever elements were introduced during that whole arc could have been introduced while advancing existing plots. It just feels out of place to me. Actually it could have been a extra book published after the whole series is done. "You want more? You wonder what happened to the weather between book 4 and 6? Will this book is for you."

[Beidomon]

Considering this is probably the best selling fantasy series in the world and each of the last 6 books has debuted as a NY Times #1 bestseller I would say that the vast majority of fantasy readers do enjoy the books.

 

First, I "enjoy" the series, and that's not what I was talking about. What I actually said was that the vast majority of readers do not love the series enough to be blind to its flaws. The fact that WoT is one of the best selling fantasy series of all time does not prove that most people lovethese books. I can also say with some certainty that the vast majority of people who bought Crossroads of Twilight felt something more akin to... disgust, fatigue, disappointemnt? after finising that paperweight.

 

However, speaking of the bestselling nature of the books did give me an interesting idea. Thousands of people have reviewed these books on Amazon, and here is the percentage of 5-Star versus 1-Star reviews for each book. It tells a very interesting story:

 

Eye of the World 58% 5-Star 8% 1-Star

The Great Hunt 65% 5-Star 3% 1-Star

The Dragon Reborn 54% 5-Star 4% 1-Star

The Shadow Rising 55% 5-Star 5% 1-Star

The Fires of Heaven 43% 5-Star 9% 1-Star (Decline begins)

Lord of Chaos 49% 5-Star 10% 1-Star

A Crown of Swords 42% 5-Star 8% 1-Star

The Path of Daggers 17% 5-Star 27% 1-Star (Ouch)

Winter’s Heart 26% 5-Star 17% 1-Star (Ouch)

Crossroads of Twilight 6% 5-Star 64% 1-Star (Holy Ouch)

Knife of Dreams 25% 5-Star 20% 1-Star (Getting better, but still Ouch)

The Gathering Storm 70% 5-Star 2% 1-Star (Yay - things are happening again!)

Towers of Midnight 57% 5-Star 12% 1-Star

 

I rest my case.

[capuga]

First, I "enjoy" the series, and that's not what I was talking about. What I actually said was that the vast majority of readers do not love the series enough to be blind to its flaws.

 

What you said was the vast majority of fantasy readers do not like a lot of the plot details in the later books. I was just pointing out that the sales numbers do not support this position. Considering the amount of people that continue to purchase the series, I can only conclude that the vast majority of fantasy readers mostly like what goes on in the books. This includes myself and I could easily point out several things that I view as shortcomings in the series.

 

The fact that WoT is one of the best selling fantasy series of all time does not prove that most people lovethese books.

 

Perhaps not love, but sales figures are a good indication of what people enjoy. If the vast majority of fantasy readers disliked great portions of the books like you claimed, I doubt that the books would sell so well.

 

I can also say with some certainty that the vast majority of people who bought Crossroads of Twilight felt something more akin to... disgust, fatigue, disappointemnt? after finising that paperweight.

 

Can't really argue with you there.

 

However, speaking of the bestselling nature of the books did give me an interesting idea. Thousands of people have reviewed these books on Amazon, and here is the percentage of 5-Star versus 1-Star reviews for each book. It tells a very interesting story:

 

Eye of the World 58% 5-Star 8% 1-Star

The Great Hunt 65% 5-Star 3% 1-Star

The Dragon Reborn 54% 5-Star 4% 1-Star

The Shadow Rising 55% 5-Star 5% 1-Star

The Fires of Heaven 43% 5-Star 9% 1-Star (Decline begins)

Lord of Chaos 49% 5-Star 10% 1-Star

A Crown of Swords 42% 5-Star 8% 1-Star

The Path of Daggers 17% 5-Star 27% 1-Star (Ouch)

Winter’s Heart 26% 5-Star 17% 1-Star (Ouch)

Crossroads of Twilight 6% 5-Star 64% 1-Star (Holy Ouch)

Knife of Dreams 25% 5-Star 20% 1-Star (Getting better, but still Ouch)

The Gathering Storm 70% 5-Star 2% 1-Star (Yay - things are happening again!)

Towers of Midnight 57% 5-Star 12% 1-Star

 

I rest my case.

 

Keep in mind that the readership of these books is in the hundreds of thousands. So a couple thousand reviews is but a small fraction of the overall readership. And again, you are only showing the love (5 star) and hate (1 star) numbers. When you add the 3 thru 5 star reviews together you still get the large majority (other than CoT) that enjoy the books. Which doesn't support your statement that the vast majority of fantasy readers dislike what RJ did with the books.

[Beidomon]

What you said was the vast majority of fantasy readers do not like a lot of the plot details in the later books. I was just pointing out that the sales numbers do not support this position. Considering the amount of people that continue to purchase the series, I can only conclude that the vast majority of fantasy readers mostly like what goes on in the books. This includes myself and I could easily point out several things that I view as shortcomings in the series.

 

And what I'm saying is that sales figures don't tell the story. People buy the books before they read them. That's why I think the Amazon ratings are such an interesting, and more relevant, metric. I kept buying the books because I kept hoping the series would improve, and I'm sure many others did, too.

 

Of course these ratings are a small sampling, but I think its probably the biggest WoT "poll" available. More significantly than the ratings for any particular book, the ratings show a stark trend: they go down dramatically from book 7 until Sanderson took the helm. (I promise you, you would still see this trend even if you added in the 4-Star and 2-Star reviews). These books also happen to be where the majority of the plotlines I discussed above are prominent. Thus, I can conclude that the majority of readers were not enamored with these later books and plotlines. Can I prove it? No. But these ratings provide awfully good evidence.

[Mr Ares]

"Except the spankings in the series are never sexualised. There is an awful lot of swordplay in the series as well, should we start reading stuff into that? Or RJ's love of describing dresses?"

 

they're not sexualized because they're fetishized.

No, they're not. You see them as fetishised, there's a difference. I do think you need to be reading something into it to see "RJ liked spanking". Maybe he did, maybe he didn't, but WoT isn't evidence either way.

 

What you said was the vast majority of fantasy readers do not like a lot of the plot details in the later books. I was just pointing out that the sales numbers do not support this position. Considering the amount of people that continue to purchase the series, I can only conclude that the vast majority of fantasy readers mostly like what goes on in the books. This includes myself and I could easily point out several things that I view as shortcomings in the series.

 

And what I'm saying is that sales figures don't tell the story. People buy the books before they read them.

But presumably after they have read the last one. So if PoD was bad, and everyone hated it, why would they go on to buy WH? OK, thye might think it was a fluke, and still like the series. After they've bought CoT, thus several bad books in a row, they might well be re-evaluating their willingness to keep buying the series. And yet KoD still topped the bestseller lists. The public don't seem to have much wariness about buying the books, which is what you'd expect if they really disliked the last few in a row.

That's why I think the Amazon ratings are such an interesting, and more relevant, metric. I kept buying the books because I kept hoping the series would improve, and I'm sure many others did, too.

People might indeed continue buying the books because they hope they improve, they could also keep buying them because they still enjoy them. In fact, if you really disliked it you would probably drop the series, or go to the library, or wait for the paperback on the next one. Once bitten, twice shy. While there may be aspects of the books that people disliked, those aspects apparently didn't put people off to such a huge extent that they stopped buying the books. It just meant they thought it was not as good as it could have been, but still worth reading the series. Amazon ratings are laregely going to be made up of people who were sufficiently moved they would want to comment on the book. The sales of the books are indicative of the silent majority, but because they are silent we don't really know why they kept buying them.

 

Of course these ratings are a small sampling, but I think its probably the biggest WoT "poll" available. More significantly than the ratings for any particular book, the ratings show a stark trend: they go down dramatically from book 7 until Sanderson took the helm.

No, they started improving with KoD, by your own admission earlier. Really, the only way to tell what people disliked about later books from Amazon is by reading the actual reviews.

[Mrs. Cindy Gill]

respectfully - i think when the argument gets to the "No, they,re not; yes, they are," stage, it's really over.

 

may peace favor our keyboards.

[GaseousAnomaly]

Considering this is probably the best selling fantasy series in the world and each of the last 6 books has debuted as a NY Times #1 bestseller I would say that the vast majority of fantasy readers do enjoy the books.

 

First, I "enjoy" the series, and that's not what I was talking about. What I actually said was that the vast majority of readers do not love the series enough to be blind to its flaws. The fact that WoT is one of the best selling fantasy series of all time does not prove that most people lovethese books. I can also say with some certainty that the vast majority of people who bought Crossroads of Twilight felt something more akin to... disgust, fatigue, disappointemnt? after finising that paperweight.

 

However, speaking of the bestselling nature of the books did give me an interesting idea. Thousands of people have reviewed these books on Amazon, and here is the percentage of 5-Star versus 1-Star reviews for each book. It tells a very interesting story:

 

Eye of the World 58% 5-Star 8% 1-Star

The Great Hunt 65% 5-Star 3% 1-Star

The Dragon Reborn 54% 5-Star 4% 1-Star

The Shadow Rising 55% 5-Star 5% 1-Star

The Fires of Heaven 43% 5-Star 9% 1-Star (Decline begins)

Lord of Chaos 49% 5-Star 10% 1-Star

A Crown of Swords 42% 5-Star 8% 1-Star

The Path of Daggers 17% 5-Star 27% 1-Star (Ouch)

Winter’s Heart 26% 5-Star 17% 1-Star (Ouch)

Crossroads of Twilight 6% 5-Star 64% 1-Star (Holy Ouch)

Knife of Dreams 25% 5-Star 20% 1-Star (Getting better, but still Ouch)

The Gathering Storm 70% 5-Star 2% 1-Star (Yay - things are happening again!)

Towers of Midnight 57% 5-Star 12% 1-Star

 

I rest my case.

I think you are absolutely right. For added weight you can check how one person rated all the books(for those who did) and you see the same dip in the ratings.

[Beidomon]

Right. I'm not trying to change anyone's opinions on the books - I'm using evidence to answer the question posed. If you want to know why people don't like WoT, look at which books were well received, and which ones were not. As I demonstrated above, the numbers speak for themselves. Books 7-10 are rated significantly lower than Books 1-4. Ergo, if you want to know why people don't like WoT, look to Books 7-10. It's a simple matter of logic. These books have a slower pacing, introduce more minor characters, and focus on certain plotlines.

 

If you enjoyed the latter Jordan books, more power to you. Personally, I thought they were pretty dull, with the exception of events like the Cleansing.

[moratcorlm]

If the numbers speak for themselves, then why are you speaking for them?