First Time Reading the First Book

[Suttree]

I can only imagine the potential discussion that talking about the particulars of what led to the Breaking may provoke. We'd probably have to discuss characters we haven't met or seen yet. It may be better, Always sunny, if said discussion was put on hold for now. At least until after book four, if not until later (six or seven), even.

 

Good point, on that note do you know when "tSaSG" was released? After what book?

[MasterAblar]

I can only imagine the potential discussion that talking about the particulars of what led to the Breaking may provoke. We'd probably have to discuss characters we haven't met or seen yet. It may be better, Always sunny, if said discussion was put on hold for now. At least until after book four, if not until later (six or seven), even.

 

Good point, on that note do you know when "tSaSG" was released? After what book?

 

In 1996, before or after aCoS, not sure which.

[UGAShadow]

Yeah RJ definitely has an obvious gender bias that becomes apparent in a lot of small situations that add up as you say. I think the worst examples actually come later in the series when we look more in depth at the Aes Sedai and the Aiel, and with the treatment of female villains. I only object in this thread at times when I think sunny has picked up something that isn't sexist and tries to make it so. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think it's sexist the Dragon in this turning is male. Sure the world needs their messiah, and he's a male, but as we know he would have failed horribly on so many different occasions if not for the various women in the series. If this were a story about an organization of men looking for a female channeller, wouldn't that also be a problem since in that case it would be a fairly typical epic fantasy world where men hold the major positions of power? I suppose he could have avoided the problem by making Rand a hermaphrodite. Gender balance ftw

 

 

 

I've always thought the Dragon was spun out again because he was essentially the cause of the Breaking. He's responsible for the taint and the shoddy prison the Dark One is in. Its pretty common sense that he would be spun out again to atone for his sins.

[Puny]

But there is no such reference about atoning for sins in WoT. The characters themselves may feel that they need to atone for some wrongdoing, but I don´t think the concept off being reborn is tied to atoning some sin. They want to be reborn again, unlike say Buddists in our world who see the cycles of rebirth as something to break out of. Im in the minority group that thinks rebirth is both desirable and necessery for the soul.

But on the other hand they hope for salvation... maybe that ties into the rebirth or maybe it´s just salvation from the Dark One.

[Terez]

That's the thing, though - Sunny's critiques are not centered in the context of the story. Sunny's criticizing RJ for crafting a story where strong female characters need a man.

 

It might seem idyllic for there to be a world where women don't rely on men at all, no men have any skills that are superior to women, and men always listen to/obey women, but I wonder how Sunny would react to the opposite. The sheer fact that the opposite would generate an epic rant is proof that it's not an egalitarian philosophy that Sunny's talking about - it's distinctly pro-woman (and anti-man).

 

I'm almost tempted to do a WOT reread and blog about all the places that women are portrayed as better than men. That would really bring the hypocrisy home.

 

I've been tempted to do the same - and I'm a woman! I began reading the series six months after CoT came out and finished reading the entire series in two weeks (despite dropping tFoH on the floor in anger, refusing to read for three days before someone told me what happened later regarding Lan and Nyn, then throwing LoC against the wall when Rand was treated so horribly), and I spent the entire two weeks thinking the women were a bunch of arrogant jerks who needed a good punch in the face. That Sunny finds everything so sexist against women makes me laugh. What doesn't make me laugh is that the man-hating is so extreme that the WoT men can NOT win, no matter what they do. If they help Egwene (her favorite character), they're sexist pigs for not letting her get her face bashed in. If they don't help her, they're sexist pigs for not caring about her. WTF? It's a clear case of "damned if they do and damned if they don't".

 

The whole sexism thing is on my last nerve anyway. I've noticed in other threads that the Egwene worshipers use that to attack anyone who dares voice a negative opinion of the biggest Mary Sue ever (she makes Bella Swan seem more believable by comparison). As far as I'm concerned, that argument should be included with Godwin's Law (losing an argument because you bring up Hitler). In other words, accuse someone of sexism for disliking Egwene and you lose by default.

We are talking about two different things here:

 

1) RJ's gender biases

2) in-world sexism in WoT

 

The in-world sexism is just a fictional portrayal, while RJ's biases are real. The women are intended to be a bit chauvinist, because that's the logical result of a world where women are the only magic-wielders. Some believe that is part of the problem, since RJ's females are so hard to relate to. Most readers take that out on the females themselves as if they were real people (see sig) rather than realizing that RJ didn't make them as sympathetic as he perhaps intended to. There is always a great deal of latent sexism in Egwene-bashing threads.

[Sleeper]

The in-world sexism is just a fictional portrayal, while RJ's biases are real. The women are intended to be a bit chauvinist, because that's the logical result of a world where women are the only magic-wielders. Some believe that is part of the problem, since RJ's females are so hard to relate to. Most readers take that out on the females themselves as if they were real people (see sig) rather than realizing that RJ didn't make them as sympathetic as he perhaps intended to. There is always a great deal of latent sexism in Egwene-bashing threads.

I truly disagree with the idea that there's latent sexism in Egwene-bashing threads. I dislike her because of her character traits, not because she's a powerful woman, and I don't understand why everyone retreats to the idea that sexism is the answer for why people dislike her. I doubt you're in a position to tell me why I dislike a character, unless you know me a lot better than I know myself. Many people give completely reasonable justifications for disliking her.

 

As to the characters being dislikable because RJ didn't make them as sympathetic as he intended to, I'm not so sure. Min and Nynaeve are both great characters, as is Avi, Moiraine, Berelain, Faile (to an extent), Amys, and others that slip my mind right now. I think he wrote many of the females just the way he intended to write them.

[Terez]

I wasn't talking about you specifically, so I don't see why you got defensive. Some posters are more rational about it than others; some posters are unbelievably blind to the character flaws of the male characters, and go out of their way to make excuses for them while also going out of their way to make Egwene's actions out to be wrong-headed. It's why I normally just ignore Egwene debates; you can't reason with that kind of vitriol.

 

PS - If I had a nickel for every person who said that RJ can't write female characters at all...

[Sleeper]

I wasn't talking about you specifically, so I don't see why you got defensive. Some posters are more rational about it than others; some posters are unbelievably blind to the character flaws of the male characters, and go out of their way to make excuses for them while also going out of their way to make Egwene's actions out to be wrong-headed. It's why I normally just ignore Egwene debates; you can't reason with that kind of vitriol.

 

PS - If I had a nickel for every person who said that RJ can't write female characters at all...

Yeah, I understand you weren't referring to me specifically. I get involved in a lot of Egwene threads, so the "you're sexist" line is thrown around quite a lot, I guess I just got a little tired of it and overreacted

 

I don't think he necessarily is bad at writing female characters, I just think he maybe caricatures some of them slightly.

[Terez]

I agree with the caricature thing - I brought that up to Brandon a while back, and now everyone is saying it, so I'm guessing that rang true for a lot of people. (Brandon seemed to find it an odd concept.) I just don't understand why there are so many people who feel that Egwene-bashing is a worthwhile hobby. I'd much rather discuss theories about what she might do in the story without getting into debates about her character's moral integrity or lack thereof, but that seems impossible since the Egwene-haters often go way overboard in what they think Egwene is capable of (here is a good example from Theoryland - you'll see some familiar faces in the comments) and a debate about that inevitably turns into a debate about Egwene's virtue.

[UGAShadow]

But there is no such reference about atoning for sins in WoT. The characters themselves may feel that they need to atone for some wrongdoing, but I don´t think the concept off being reborn is tied to atoning some sin. They want to be reborn again, unlike say Buddists in our world who see the cycles of rebirth as something to break out of. Im in the minority group that thinks rebirth is both desirable and necessery for the soul.

But on the other hand they hope for salvation... maybe that ties into the rebirth or maybe it´s just salvation from the Dark One.

 

 

 

 

Rand knows which soul he is. He is Lews Therin. He was prophecied to come. I figure that's enough to say he's born to atone for what he did in the past life.

[Terez]

A better way of putting may be that he is given a chance to fix what he helped to break. I don't know why the Creator (or the Pattern) would expect him to 'atone' for something that was largely out of his control, but there is a sort of poetic quality to giving him the chance to make it all better.

[csarmi]

I wasn't talking about you specifically, so I don't see why you got defensive. Some posters are more rational about it than others; some posters are unbelievably blind to the character flaws of the male characters, and go out of their way to make excuses for them while also going out of their way to make Egwene's actions out to be wrong-headed. It's why I normally just ignore Egwene debates; you can't reason with that kind of vitriol.

 

PS - If I had a nickel for every person who said that RJ can't write female characters at all...

 

I think it's more like some people get stuck in Rand's PoV and never manage to move on. They believe Rand is their hero and obviously, anyone who isn't in awe of their hero, doesn't worship their hero enough (I mean any character) gets the bashing.

[Bluedust9]

*man does thing* damn sexism.

 

*woman does thing* not doing it as strong as man, damn sexism.

 

*woman does thing as strong as man* why do women need to be like men to show they're strong, damn sexism.

 

In the end, STFU.

[Beldin]

Ok, I've been following this discussion somewhat now and want to add my thoughts on the whole gender thing..

 

Political Power in the Two Rivers:

In modern democracies or republics, the legislative power is often divided, e.g. house of representatives and senate, house of commons and house of lords, etc. To pass laws, both bodies need to agree.

In the Two Rivers, although they are a part of Andor, there are no formal laws or settings concerning political processes - the people govern themselves. So, their form of government wasn't a conscious decision (as it was in modern republics, which were set up by writing a constitution), but was the result of tradition and common sense. This tradition didn't result in a feudal system (as would maybe be expected in a medievalesque setting) but, in essence, in a democratic system. The two bodies that govern life in the villages of the Two Rivers are the Village Council and the Women Circle. They are both equally important, though they have different ways of working. And don't be fooled by their names. Village Council might sound like a formal body similar to village government and the women circle may sound like a knitting circle (though, in fact, knitting circle can have a grander meaning in WOT, too ;), but they are equal in power. Yes, as in every system of joint ruling, responsibilities might be divided, and the two bodies protect their responsibilities from meddling by the "other side". But, neither the council nor the circle can press to hard or go their own way, decision, in the end, need to find majorities in both bodies.

In my opinion, RJ has tried to show that, if people are left to govern themselves, they could come up with a democratic solution to government. I would even call the Two Rivers a "little Utopia" - as in the real world, the absence of formal law and state to enforce those laws, has in most cases turned to anarchy or dictatorship (or feudalism, which in essence is the same - the strong, be they a queen or a king, get all the power and the common people get nothing). And even today, most politicians in democratic countries are male still. So, even though you might find the division of legislative power among gender lines to be sexist, it is, in result, more gender equal a system than in modern republics, as males and females are given equal say in matters by definition!

In fact, and I won't spoil too much here, we will encounter two other societies, where men and women hold distinctly equally important political positions. You could even argue, that women there, as women at this time are the only known magic users, hold the de facto greater power than men. But we will discuss once you've read a few more books :)

 

Stereotypes and Gender Equality:

Yes, we come across a lot of stereotypes in WOT. But, and that's very important to reflect, those stereotypes are not a reflection of the authors creation per se, but a reflection of the minds and opinions of the characters he created. The boys, and especially Rand, think that women need protection all the time. It is a stereotypic notion on their part, even if their intentions are good. In the course of the books however, they come to alter their opinion and grow as persons - as can be expected while growing into adulthood. Likewise, Nyneave for example, has a general notion that all men are block heads and need to be shown the path of wisdom (even Lan). Again, that's not a sexist projection by RJ, but a trait of her character - and she comes to learn, in time, that her view might be flawed..

So, why did RJ create these characters they way he did, and why did he put so much weight on gender instead of just randomly creating a Wizard, a Huntress, a male Cook, a school girl, a Queen or a stable boy, that would act according to their station without regard on their own or their opposite's gender?

Gender, in WOT, is two sides of the same coin. The power (magic) has two sides, Saidin and Saidar. They turn the universe and are only usable by men (saidin) or by women (saidar). But, both are equally important for the functioning of the world. As the wheel, the universe, time would not work with just one of the halves of the power, also, in the reality of WOT, men and women need to work together on equal ground. In the age of legends, men and women both wielded the power and worked together to accomplish the greatest tasks. They could and can both work by themselves, but the greatest efforts need both forms of the power. That design feature of the magic system of WOT inherently calls for gender equality here. Compare to Harry Potter, for example: There, gender plays no role in magic use, and thus anyone can be a powerful wizard or witch, and by happenstance, Voldemort and Harry are male, Hermione is female, etc. Not so in WOT. You could argue, that the Harry Potter system is more gender equal, as it disregards gender altogether.

 

To me, the opposite is the case. Acknowledging the differences between women and men, both in body and mind (and to me, difference doesn't mean superiority of one or the other) opens the possibility of the "Two sides of the same coin" idea I mentioned before. To make the best possible society, men and women have to work together, they are by themselves only half of what is needed and can only reach their full potential in unison with the other gender. As in real life, men can't reproduce without women and vise versa. This is at the core of our evolution and the reason for it. You could imagine nature working differently, and all beings being able to reproduce vegetatively or choosing their gender according to need (as some organisms do), but in the majority, life on earth doesn't work that way. Maybe things are different on other planets, but I don't think I'll find out during my life time. Back to the topic: In my opinion, RJ tried to create a world where this duality of life, male and female, isn't only in the beings themselves, but embodied in the workings of the universe itself. Ying and Yang. To me, this makes WOT very much the opposite of a sexist world, as none of the genders dominates the other by design. This doesn't mean that in specific cases or in the minds of the single character, sexism or prejudice doesn't play a role. But, these are the characters that live in that world - and to me it's also very interesting to see their evolution over time and see them overcoming their prejudices. This makes for a good story.

 

Again, why the emphasis on gender? I guess there are other possibilities to show the duality of the world, you could divide power, traits, prejudice or nationalistic feelings by race (as the Nazis did), by species (as in Tolkien) or language (as Europe). But, RJ took the duality of sexes inherent in our own world (and if you can't accept that there are differences between men and women, again, without saying that one is superior to the other, then these thoughts are probably lost on you), and imagined a universe, where those differences are inbred into the workings of the universe itself. To me, that's pretty utopian.

 

PS: One other thing. The issue of Nyneave facing doubt because of her age and calling that sexist: Just to maybe put another perspective on this, imagine that it was a young Mayor, chosen by the village council because he was so good at negotiating wool prizes with the merchants coming to the Two Rivers. He has an important skill for society, something that no one else can equal (just as Nyneave is so good at listening to wind and healing). So, he was chosen as the mayer even though he's only 21 (just like Nyneave). If this was the case, could there be any doubt, that this young mayor would face similar doubts from people much older than him? The village council might not voice their doubts, since it was them that did the choosing in the first place (just as the Women Circle in the case of Nyneave), but some women twice the mayor's age would certainly think him too young and not fit for the position, no?

 

PPS: By themselves, the Aes Sedai represent both the most powerful and richest entity in the WOT at this point. They also live in the most beautiful city, but that's beside the point :). Having a monopoly on magic, worldly monarchs (be they female or male) are in awe of Aes Sedai and take their suggestions seriously. It's not the same as saying Aes Sedai are oppenly in power as in an empire (there is another empire that we will encounter some time later, where that is de facto the case), but they hold all the strings. Men on the other hand, can't for the most part wield magic to any effect. Those that can, are shunned, hunted down and as good as executed. Seeing this setting of where the power lies in WOT, can you honestly say that women have nothing to say?

[UGAShadow]

Holy crap that is a good first post.

 

 

You summed up what I meant better than I did Terez, btw.

[sleepinghour]

The issue of Nyneave facing doubt because of her age and calling that sexist: Just to maybe put another perspective on this, imagine that it was a young Mayor, chosen by the village council because he was so good at negotiating wool prizes with the merchants coming to the Two Rivers. He has an important skill for society, something that no one else can equal (just as Nyneave is so good at listening to wind and healing). So, he was chosen as the mayer even though he's only 21 (just like Nyneave). If this was the case, could there be any doubt, that this young mayor would face similar doubts from people much older than him?

Let's take it one step further:

 

Imagine a male character even younger than Nynaeve who returns to the Two Rivers with an important skill for society. Unlike Nynaeve, who had already been Wisdom for 5 years or so in TEoTW, it doesn't take long for this young man to win everyone's respect. They even start calling him "Lord."

 

What are the odds of something like that happening?

[Stoic]

The issue of Nyneave facing doubt because of her age and calling that sexist: Just to maybe put another perspective on this, imagine that it was a young Mayor, chosen by the village council because he was so good at negotiating wool prizes with the merchants coming to the Two Rivers. He has an important skill for society, something that no one else can equal (just as Nyneave is so good at listening to wind and healing). So, he was chosen as the mayer even though he's only 21 (just like Nyneave). If this was the case, could there be any doubt, that this young mayor would face similar doubts from people much older than him?

Let's take it one step further:

 

Imagine a male character even younger than Nynaeve who returns to the Two Rivers with an important skill for society. Unlike Nynaeve, who had already been Wisdom for 5 years or so in TEoTW, it doesn't take long for this young man to win everyone's respect. They even start calling him "Lord."

 

What are the odds of something like that happening?

Presumably it would depend on how much he had done to earn it.

 

However, a lot of people in this thread seem to be launching into side discussions and bringing in a lot of spoiler material, which is hardly fair on Always Sunny, who is trying to read through for the first time. Perhaps some more care with posting is in order.

[Always Sunny]

The tower does not accept over-aged novices.

The fact that they do accept Nynaeve (and at Accepted level for a start) is already something unheard of (because she's already quite overaged).

If she was older? No way?

 

Nynaeve is supposed to become the most power wizard ever, right? And the White Tower would have just rejected her application because of age even so? How do the Aes Sedai deal with wilders that survive into middle age if they don't bring them into their club? Do they still them? That doesn't pain the Aes Sedai in a very good light.

 

I think most of your confusion could have been avoided by a simple glance at the Glossary. Without it you'd have had exposition every page instead of every other.

 

I may have mentioned this in the blog comments some time ago, but when I first read the book I didn't even know there was a glossary. In fact, this is the first novel I've ever read that had a glossary!

 

I feel as if a book can be just fine without a lot of exposition. The less the better, I say. But what kind of writer needs to have things explained at the end of the book? Why isn't his writing strong enough to stand on its own without having a cheat sheet tucked away in there?

 

That's not what happened. Rand was working against the group. He tackled Egwene thereby knocking out two good guys from the fight.

 

Knocked out 'two good guys' from a slaughter actually. Lan got owned, the best swordsman in the book. Egwene running in was suicide. He knocked her from the fight to save her life.

 

Okay. Let's take this train of thought a bit further down the thinkin' tracks. Rand finds himself outmatched by these two evil wizards. He sees Egwene rushing to her certain death. So he jumps on her and holds her down, his friends running by him and seconds away from a grisly death. Then... then...? What was his plan after that? Sit on Egwene until Aginor walked over and decapitates them both? Was he going to pull Egwene kicking and screaming into the woods while Mat and Perrin and Nynaeve are killed? Let's say his plan works! Let's say that his best friends gave their lives so that he could get away. Then what? Is Egwene supposed to fall deeply in love with him for saving her from her own stupidness? Is she supposed to live the rest of her life (however short it will be without wizard training) not in a PTSD-related depression with a heap of survivor's guilt on top? Every year, back in Two Rivers, when they go to the cemetery to put flowers on Perrin's grave, on Mat's grave, and on Nynaeve's grave, will Egwene ever look at Rand and wonder why he pulled her away when she could have died there with her friends?

 

 

The Last Battle is prophecy; the series isn't about Aes Sedai failing to keep a lid on the jar of the Dark One. It's about preparations for the Last Battle. Yeah, the world needs the Dragon, a man. But the Dragon also needed Moiraine to save him. Aes Sedai failed at nothing.

 

I am pretty sure the Last Battle was never mention in the first book. So while the series may be about it the Eye of the World was not.

 

And what do you mean "Aes Sedai failed at nothing"? I don't mean to sound flippant (any more than I usually do, I guess). I really don't know what you mean by that.

 

So lets reverse the roles in the book. It's a story of a male organisation tracking down a female, the Dragon, who is necessary to save the world? Would that be a sexist story to you? I imagine it would, and I can imagine it now - only male wizards are allowed, all female witches are hunted down and taken care of.

 

That depends upon the rest of the story, just as the Aes Sedai hunting for a man depends upon the rest of the story. In and of itself, that basic plot is not sexist. But remember what I said about one instance of equality does not mean that the entire system isn't unequal? If the rest of the Wheel of Time stays the same then we still have a sexist world.

 

Sexism can be found in anything if you look hard enough, and you are hunting it down.

 

You'd better believe it! Sexism is everywhere; it permeates everything (especially culture, like this book!). It isn't as if I'm hunting for it, though. I've learned how to see it. It's like how a regular person walking through a forest will not see the trees the same way an arborist would. They both see the same things but the person with more training or education would see things others might miss. It's the same with this book, the same with everything else, too.

 

Anyway, I'll go read your latest Chapter posts now, I do enjoy them. :)

 

Thanks! It makes me happy knowing this. It really does. It's why I'm doing this, after all!

 

It's not a matter of women being unable to do what men could do, as it's something men wouldn't be able to do, either.

 

I agree that men probably wouldn't have been able to keep the world together if the female Aes Sedai went crazy. But that's not what happened. What ifs aren't what I'm talking about, though. I'm talking about what happened.

 

It's beyond the scope of the series (a turning of the Wheel's way too long for any character to figure this out), but there is a female Champion that would be used if necessary.

 

See what I mean? We're not talking about some female Champion counterpart to the Dragon that exists theoretically outside of the series. We're talking about this series. Specifically, what happens here and now in this series, in this first book. There might be a Light One out there that is the opposite of the Dark One, a Chaos to oppose the Pattern, an Unmaker for the Creator, and some sort of Anti-Wheel for the Wheel. That might all be true. But it changes nothing when it comes to Moiraine's quest to find a man to help her fix the world/fight the Dark One because she's not strong enough to do it on her own.

 

If saidar had been tainted and the One Power institution was completely male-centric, it would have likely woven out a woman instead.

 

Again, coulda/woulda/shoulda. If things were different then things would be different. You're saying to me, as I understand it, that out of all of the possible stories Robert Jordan could have written he chose this one on purpose. This is the story he wanted to tell even though he could have told lots of other ones. That means he favors this story more than the others, right?

 

You do a good job of staying on point with your response, I'll give you that. But you're talking about what could have happened rather than what did happen/is happening. Yes, if we change a lot of things in the book then we might have a better book. But let's not deal with what might have been. Really, look at how much your argument relies on "if things were different then..."

 

If men have no institutional power over women, then there's no sexism in the books. Many, deep into the series, tend to see women having institutional power over men throughout the WoT world.

 

You know what? I can't argue with that. I don't know about the rest of the series. You might very well be right! What reason do I have to question you about that? I don't have a good reason so I'll just believe you. Hehe, for now...

 

But that means I've got to go with just what I've got in this first part of the series. And this first part has gaps (gaps that will no doubt be filled later!) that I want filled. So I fill them with real world stuff. For example, the Women's Circle never does anything important in the series so far so I just assumed that they weren't important. I'll probably be proven wrong in the future but that's what I think now. That's what I see now. That's what's going in the blog now.

 

The reason you're hung up on it is because you see it as being the same way society is now just because Rand's a man.

 

Ha, yes! This is right. I am hung up on it because it is what it is. I see it as the way society is because that's the way the book has shown society to be. We might be able to jump in a Portal Stone and find a Bizarro World where things are different, sure. But that's not where we are. We are here in this setting with Rand being a man. Things could be different, yes, I'll admit. But they didn't turn out that way. They turned out this way. So this is what I'm dealing with, what I'm talking about, and what I'm hung up on.

 

Did he? You really think women have been shown to be incompetent in this series? More so than men?

 

Incompetent? I wouldn't say that. I would say that they are culturally forced to do certain things, to take upon certain roles, based solely upon their gender. That might, for example, make women more incompetent than men in male jobs because "good girls don't do that sort of thing."

 

I think here, though, we're talking about rebuilding the world post-Breaking. I wouldn't say that women are worse than men at rebuilding the world. I'll just say that the all-female Aes Sedai sucked at it.

 

But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe something in the series later will show that the world would have been much worse without them. Time will tell!

 

I admit I haven't been following this thread at all and I've only skimmed through some of the arguments.

 

Hey, I'm happy just to be noticed! Thanks for skimming!

 

I get the impression from her early posts that Sunny's WoT-fan friends wanted her to read WoT for two reasons: 1) to see if she could figure out where the story was going, or notice all those wonderful foreshadowings that are common knowledge on the message boards, and 2) to give her feminist perspective on it, especially on the idea that RJ claimed to have created a gender-balanced world.

 

You forgot 3) because they were tired of me doing stuff like this to the Harry Potter movies. You see, one of those movies came out (like, the sixth or seventh in the series; it's like Nightmare on Elm Street in length!) so my roomie Netflixed all of the earlier ones for a marathon. Always up for a movie (I'm a big movie buff!) I sat in on them. Well, the first one. I kept on talking. Well, normally I don't but my buddies saw the movies a hundred times already so they were talking, too. But not only was I talking but I was asking question, pointing out little problems here and there. By the second movie they pretty much told me to shut up. I didn't watch the third one.

 

But they thought I could make the same comments on the Wheel of Time, I guess. Whatever the reason, I'm glad they did. I wouldn't say I'm a Wheel of Time fan as of this point, but I am a reader!

 

What doesn't make me laugh is that the man-hating is so extreme that the WoT men can NOT win, no matter what they do. If they help Egwene (her favorite character), they're sexist pigs for not letting her get her face bashed in. If they don't help her, they're sexist pigs for not caring about her. WTF? It's a clear case of "damned if they do and damned if they don't".

 

This is a pretty fair criticism. I'd really like to address it, too! So please indulge me. Please tell me specifically where I make these statements. I feel as if I've been rather consistent but I make mistakes all the time so I wouldn't be surprised I did so here. We disagree, obviously, about what's what in the story so I need you to know I'm not asking to be malicious or funny. I really want to know how we got on such different pages here.

 

And is this your first time commenting on this thread, lilltempest? Welcome to the discussion!

 

*man does thing* damn sexism.

 

*woman does thing* not doing it as strong as man, damn sexism.

 

*woman does thing as strong as man* why do women need to be like men to show they're strong, damn sexism.

 

In the end, STFU.

 

STFU? Really? That's your argument? And you're not even mentioning specific points! You're just rambling and insulting. Just look how different your post is compared to lilltempest. You're saying the same thing, more or less, but she wasn't nearly as silly about it.

 

Ha, and I do notice the irony of it:

 

*JustCharlie does thing* damn silly

 

*lilltempest does thing* better than JustCharlie just 'cause she's a woman

 

*Always Sunny sees sexism* but isn't that always true?

 

Yeah, not all that funny. But if I can't laugh at my own cheesey jokes then who will?

 

 

 

Whew, am I still writing this one reply? I had to split this sucker in half because of some forum rule about how many quotes I can include. So sorry for the double post!

[Always Sunny]

Did I say I was sorry for writing so much in this reply? Well I am. There really is no excuse for such a wall of text!

 

 

 

I would even call the Two Rivers a "little Utopia" - as in the real world, the absence of formal law and state to enforce those laws, has in most cases turned to anarchy or dictatorship (or feudalism, which in essence is the same - the strong, be they a queen or a king, get all the power and the common people get nothing). And even today, most politicians in democratic countries are male still.

 

I think it's funny that in a place without war and violence the people still organize themselves into a society based upon competition between two government bodies. Still, I'd say this little utopia is approaching anarchy (and I'm not totally opposed to the concept of anarchy); they just need to lose the Mayor and Wisdom altogether!

 

The bit about most politicians being male. Think about it: it's sometimes because women aren't allowed to run. Just like women aren't allowed to join the Village Council. Sometimes women are allowed to run, but their culture places a higher value on women taking care of the home and domestic affairs than on women in politics. Just like women in the Women's Circle.

 

So, even though you might find the division of legislative power among gender lines to be sexist, it is, in result, more gender equal a system than in modern republics, as males and females are given equal say in matters by definition!

 

Let's just assume I'm wrong about the Village Council being in charge of the town. Let's assume you're right about an equal distribution of power between an all-female Women's Circle in control of domestic affairs and an all-male Village Council in charge of external matters. This sounds exactly like the "Man Leaves the Home for a Living While Woman Stays and Takes Care of the Home" concept plastered onto local government. But let's go with that for now.

 

By definition, men have absolutely no say in domestic affairs. They can't choose who they want to marry, whether or not they can build an extension on their home, what color to paint their fence, or the decorations put up on Sunday. That's women's business. Similarly, women have no legal (or "traditional" since this isn't really a legal system by today's standards) right to bring in gleemen, sell tabac to incoming merchants, send runners to Watch Hill, organize a defense force, or interrogate visitors. The separation of powers prevents people from doing certain things based solely on that person's gender. That's a pretty good example of sexism.

 

Yes, we come across a lot of stereotypes in WOT. But, and that's very important to reflect, those stereotypes are not a reflection of the authors creation per se, but a reflection of the minds and opinions of the characters he created.

 

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree here. Everything in this book comes from Robert Jordan's mind. If he were writing a biography then then that'd be a good reason to think the people in the book had independent minds of their own. But they don't. Their minds are of the author's mind. I'm not saying he's as evil as the Trollocs or anything like that. I'm not saying that the characters core values are the same as his, either. I just mean that tiny bits here and there, unrelated to the Grand Plot, shine a light on his mind. Robort Jordan is Rand and Ba'alzamon, the Tinkers and the Whitecloaks.

 

The boys, and especially Rand, think that women need protection all the time. It is a stereotypic notion on their part, even if their intentions are good.

 

Ha, "the road to hell" and all that. But if we can agree that his behavior is questionable (I say "sexist" and you say "stereotypic") then what's the big problem with me pointing out each and every instance of him being "stereotypic" and hating on him for it? It's a character flaw that I find far more flaw-y than most other people so I'm more bothered than most when it shows up. When he gets better I will no doubt sigh with relief, at first, thankful that his old ways are falling behind him. Then I'll cheer him on as he sheds his former self to be the respectful man I hope he'll be. But he's a dick now and I won't pull my punches.

 

So, why did RJ create these characters they way he did, and why did he put so much weight on gender instead of just randomly creating a Wizard, a Huntress, a male Cook, a school girl, a Queen or a stable boy, that would act according to their station without regard on their own or their opposite's gender?

Gender, in WOT, is two sides of the same coin. The power (magic) has two sides, Saidin and Saidar. They turn the universe and are only usable by men (saidin) or by women (saidar).

 

Can I reword what you wrote to help make my point?

 

So, why did RJ create these characters they way he did, and why did he put so much weight on gender instead of just randomly creating a Wizard, a Huntress, a male Cook, a school girl, a Queen or a stable boy, that would act according to their station without regard to their own or their opposite's gender? Gender, in WOT, is important because RJ created the magic system to make gender important. RJ chose to have gender be a divisive factor in all aspects of life, with women in the nurturing/domestic half while men in the aggressive/external half.

 

See? It wasn't an accident that saidin and saidar divided the genders magically. That's not a natural phenomenon. Robert Jordan made the world that way because he liked it, because it's pretty cool, because it'd make a fun story. There aren't very many male cooks because Robert Jordan didn't want any there.

 

You could argue, that the Harry Potter system is more gender equal, as it disregards gender altogether.

 

I've never read Harry Potter. Maybe I should have had that book series be my first step into fantasy? But going by what you say (and all the Harry Potter information I get from the first two movies and from just by soaking in the pop culture) then I'd agree that Hogwarts is much more gender equal. That's a good thing, in my opinion.

 

To me, the opposite is the case. Acknowledging the differences between women and men, both in body and mind (and to me, difference doesn't mean superiority of one or the other) opens the possibility of the "Two sides of the same coin" idea I mentioned before.

 

Acknowledging the differences that are completely made up for this story. Create a world that separates the genders, artificially created differences between them, and see where the story goes from there. Yes, I'll admit this does open up a lot of plots. "Two sides of the same coin" is just one of them.

 

Imagine, if you will, Transformers. Someone said, "hey, let's create a race of space robots that can transform into trucks!" Then someone suggested that they make them into Autobots and Decepticons. This opens up a lot of plotlines to explore: civil war, brother against brother, different manufacturers for the trucks competing against each other, and so on. Something similar with gender in the Wheel of Time. Take men and woman (already separated, I'll admit) and force them to fight/cooperate as a mechanic of the setting.

 

Basically, it's putting genders in two opposite corners, giving them different abilities/responsibleness/drinking fountains, and calling them equal. And, really, I hate to admit this but it isn't the inequality that bugs me the most. It's the fact that lots of folks don't see it or defend it as if it's okay because it makes a cool story.

 

 

To me, this makes WOT very much the opposite of a sexist world, as none of the genders dominates the other by design.

 

Ah! Yes. The duality could, maybe, be seen as the opposite of sexist. But the design and the execution here are far apart. So even though we are in some sort of Fallen World the "utopia" of Emond's Field is a place I'd never want to live in. The cosmology of the setting is supposed to be equal between the genders but the world, the people down there in the dirt, are certainly not. I'm not complaining about how the world is supposed to work when everything goes smoothly (though, to be honest, I'm not a big fan of separate but equal gender roles) I'm complaining about how the world actually is in the story.

 

 

Again, why the emphasis on gender? I guess there are other possibilities to show the duality of the world, you could divide power, traits, prejudice or nationalistic feelings by race (as the Nazis did), by species (as in Tolkien) or language (as Europe).

 

I'm not a writer (don't let all that writing in the blog fool you) so I'm not sure how to divide the world. Duality probably won't work with language. And Tolkien's "species" smells awfully like "race" to me. But I've never read anything by the guy (though I'm interested in "On Fairy-Stories" that he wrote) so this is just me talking out of my ass here.

 

But, RJ took the duality of sexes inherent in our own world (and if you can't accept that there are differences between men and women, again, without saying that one is superior to the other, then these thoughts are probably lost on you), and imagined a universe, where those differences are inbred into the workings of the universe itself. To me, that's pretty utopian.

 

Of course there are differences between the sexes. But those differences are along reproductive lines. There is no biological reason women have to knit, be excluded from combat, and cast spells by surrendering to the magic.

 

PS: One other thing. The issue of Nyneave facing doubt because of her age and calling that sexist

 

This discussion depends upon the other discussions about gender in Two Rivers. If you're right about everything being completely equal between the genders then I'd have to agree with you here. Yes, if gender doesn't matter then a young Mayor would and should receive the same treatment as a young Wisdom. But if I'm right, and the menfolk are, well, more equal than the women, then a young Mayor would be seen as a hot shot young ace taking advantage of his natural skill.

 

PPS: By themselves, the Aes Sedai represent both the most powerful and richest entity in the WOT at this point. They also live in the most beautiful city, but that's beside the point :). Having a monopoly on magic, worldly monarchs (be they female or male) are in awe of Aes Sedai and take their suggestions seriously. It's not the same as saying Aes Sedai are oppenly in power as in an empire (there is another empire that we will encounter some time later, where that is de facto the case), but they hold all the strings. Men on the other hand, can't for the most part wield magic to any effect. Those that can, are shunned, hunted down and as good as executed. Seeing this setting of where the power lies in WOT, can you honestly say that women have nothing to say?

 

This is just me, here, and my non-fantasy background in historic non-fiction. But I find it really hard to believe "best in the world" when it comes to anything. The world is big. This is earth in the future/past, right? So it's as big as earth. Even Rome was never the "best in the world". Neither the Vatican nor Caesar's Palace. Our world's largest empires, the Mongols and and Romans and the Greeks (even the Spanish and English) never controlled the world.

 

The Aes Sedai don't have a monopoly on magic, either. I've seen wolfbrother magic, Aiel magic, Seanchan magic, Ogier magic, sniffer magic, the Dark One's own magic, Mashadar magic, and who knows what else will appear in the future. If anything, the Aes Sedai are a regional power with a monopoly of one local major magic power source.

 

Their real strength lies in their influence, right? They don't influence the Blight, the Aiel, or the Seanchan. Their influence seems to fade the further from Tar Valon you get (even Andor has a large anti-witch population). Like Trollocs, I'll bet there are places who think Aes Sedai are myth.

 

But I'm getting ahead of myself. This is what I think right now. There's nothing in the story so far to change my mind but you have to remember I'm not that far into it.

 

 

Okay. We're nearing the end of this reply. I know what you're thinking: finally. So without any more fanfare I give you the last blog post on the Eye of the World:

 

The Wheel Turns and Glossary

[csarmi]

The tower does not accept over-aged novices.

The fact that they do accept Nynaeve (and at Accepted level for a start) is already something unheard of (because she's already quite overaged).

If she was older? No way?

 

Nynaeve is supposed to become the most power wizard ever, right? And the White Tower would have just rejected her application because of age even so? How do the Aes Sedai deal with wilders that survive into middle age if they don't bring them into their club? Do they still them? That doesn't paint the Aes Sedai in a very good light.

 

They pretend they don't exist.

 

 

Did he? You really think women have been shown to be incompetent in this series? More so than men?

 

Incompetent? I wouldn't say that. I would say that they are culturally forced to do certain things, to take upon certain roles, based solely upon their gender. That might, for example, make women more incompetent than men in male jobs because "good girls don't do that sort of thing."

 

I think here, though, we're talking about rebuilding the world post-Breaking. I wouldn't say that women are worse than men at rebuilding the world. I'll just say that the all-female Aes Sedai sucked at it.

 

But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe something in the series later will show that the world would have been much worse without them. Time will tell!

 

The world wouldn't exist without them. The breaking would have ended mankind, or if it didn't, the trolloc wars would have.

[dobraine]

When someone just compounds the word hate I really stop caring.

I think this would be a better read if A)It was funny or B)

it was an academic view of the series. As it stands it is neither

and stands somewhere in the middle-ground. It boggles me mind that

when you sound like a cat in washing machine you wonder why that

bothers people. You have the express opinion that this is crap.

You don't seem to view fantasy with anything but contempt.

You just about dismiss arguments with a hand-wave. This is just

painful. But nobody forced me to read it so I will give my opinion

and leave.

[sVieira151]

After reading your arguments above, Sunny, I can see your point of view, and I'm fine with it. You don't like how the suystem is set up in Emond's Field, so you wouldn't want to live with it. But do we see any of the females complain about their stations or their jobs. It's all complaining about the men like "that woolhead boy will get himself killed if he keeps doing so many woolheaded things!" rather than "I hate doing these stupid dishes, I wish I could go and sheer some sheep/be a blacksmith etc".

It seems that the women are content with their 'social positions'. Keeping the men in line, and looking after the idiots(the Wheel of Time is filled with these). They are fine with the men deciding what is to be traded and what isnt, the women don't give a crap about that. The women are fine with where they sit, behind the scenes cotrolling the men in the household. You are shown that whnen you hear the things the woman playing matchmaking with Tam say.

 

Yeah, it is sexist. But the female characters are fine with it. The one is exception is Egwene, who wants to go out adventure. Of course i'd likewomen to have equal opportunities than men, and have them be doing all teh same sort of things. But if they are fine with it, I don't care. Just like how I would be fine if I was told to be a line judge rather than the Umpire in tennis.

 

 

Anyways, would write more but of to play Badminton. So that's all for now.

[Erunion]

The equal opportunities thing is true (especially in the Eye of the World, much less so as the series progresses), and it's something I never really thought of before reading your blog posts.

 

Yes, the Eye of the World is like The Lord of the Rings. It was an intentional decision by RJ (personally, I think it was unnecessary, but that's just my opinion) to make the Eye of the World familiar for Fantasy readers, because (still true now, but even more so in the 80's/90's) the Lord of the Rings was one of the few Fantasy books that was actually well known outside of a very small percentage of the population.

For me, I never really cared because I started reading the Wheel of Time in a very, very strange order (I read the prequel novel, A New Spring, then I read the first half of the Eye of the World, and then I read the Great Hunt, then I read the second half of the Eye of the World). It was odd reading things out of order like that, but I really enjoyed the series anyway, and got completely hooked on it rather quickly.

 

Yes, the Wheel of Time is huge. If you don't think you can keep up the pace, just give us smaller updates as opposed to big blog posts. Or, you know, just read it and have fun. Whatever 'floats your boat'.

[Agitel]

Again, coulda/woulda/shoulda. If things were different then things would be different. You're saying to me, as I understand it, that out of all of the possible stories Robert Jordan could have written he chose this one on purpose. This is the story he wanted to tell even though he could have told lots of other ones. That means he favors this story more than the others, right?

 

And if women were unable to do anything but temporarily seal the Dark One away without the help of men? If women broke the world and destroyed civilization when it probably could have been avoided if they'd listened to men and hadn't acted rashly? If women were forbidden from doing sorcery, men were far more chauvinist, and an all-male institution that had it's fingers in everything and which many of its followers openly disdained women was the most respected one in the world?

 

I suppose it could be more interesting in some ways, as it could have been meant to parallel the real world and be about a women's journey for redemption and to prove to men that women are just as important and needed, but Jordan actually tried to flip everything on it's head. He found putting women in a position of tremendous power interesting, and many people (mostly men) seem to think he went too far with that, to which Jordan found it funny that it was males complaining and that it revealed their innate sexism.

 

There's different ways of looking at things. Again, I do think Jordan himself was a victim of his own male bias and privilege, particularly early on, don't get me wrong. Perrin and Egwene and Bela is a great example, and there are others (why no female ta'veren in the forefront? oh there may be some answers to that, actually, but he could easily have made them anyway). There's also the traditional women's roles (though it's certainly not the rule, there are women who defy those roles and scenes were some women criticize others for doing things so mundane), and rather than destroy the idea of gender roles he decided to design the world to where all are considered equally important and not viewed as a lesser task, but again, there's both good and bad things with that, perhaps the bad outweigh the good if you see gender roles as having innate dominant/submissive qualities. There's also other examples, there are times where he could have put more emphasis directly on the women rather than leaving it as something mentioned in exposition (though again, I wouldn't say that's the rule, there are spots he could have done this, but there will be lots of women in powerful and dominant roles in the series). And there's things that probably can't be defended very well at all and are the result of his own innate bias which he was unable to squash.

 

I suppose he also could have just scrapped the story completely, one side or the other, to avoid any risk of sexism, but where's the fun in that? Then he's actively choosing not to do a plot, no matter which way it's flipped, because he's afraid no matter which side he makes men and which side he makes women it'll be viewed as sexist against women.

 

Another influence on why he chose this story was because he was focusing on the stories of Tyr (Rand), Odin (Mat), and Thor (Perrin) and other figures in Norse mythology [in fact, given that this is supposed to be a part of our world, the stories you're reading about now are supposed to be the inspiration for those old mythologies and the projections of Ragnarok ahead... at the same time], which is predominantly male centric. He could have chosen a different mythology to be the focus (again, there are elements of more than just Norse mythology, but other pagan and even Judeo-Christian and Islamic mythology), but for whatever reason he liked that one.

[RyanL24]

I think most of your confusion could have been avoided by a simple glance at the Glossary. Without it you'd have had exposition every page instead of every other.

 

I may have mentioned this in the blog comments some time ago, but when I first read the book I didn't even know there was a glossary. In fact, this is the first novel I've ever read that had a glossary!

 

 

I read a little about this earlier in the thread... the glossary is not a part of the book. You shouldn't have to read it to understand the book. I read a lot of books, but 99% of the time they are in audio format. There is no glossary in any of the 13 WoT books I've checked out.

 

What doesn't make me laugh is that the man-hating is so extreme that the WoT men can NOT win, no matter what they do. If they help Egwene (her favorite character), they're sexist pigs for not letting her get her face bashed in. If they don't help her, they're sexist pigs for not caring about her. WTF? It's a clear case of "damned if they do and damned if they don't".

 

This is a pretty fair criticism. I'd really like to address it, too! So please indulge me. Please tell me specifically where I make these statements. I feel as if I've been rather consistent but I make mistakes all the time so I wouldn't be surprised I did so here.

 

lilltempest is exactly right. It's actually the reason I bailed on reading your blog a while back. At first I was right there with you, and didn't understand why everybody was so critical of the way you read the books. I thought it was different and interesting. It was very funny too. Then something changed...

 

 

A long time ago you said "Two Rivers is sexist blah blah and women have no power." Somebody showed you a quote that went something like: "Cenn if you don't keep out of women's circle business you'll be doing your own cooking, and it won't be in my kitchen. You'll be making your own bed, but it won't be in my house." I thought "yeah, that guy really showed her a great quote that can't be denied" because what I mainly see in the quote is that the women own the property in the Two Rivers, the women's circle makes the decisions, and men had better keep their collective noses out of it. All that you saw was that the only power women have is to take away their cooking, what a sexist pig RJ is. Why didn't you care that it is the wife's house? Because to acknowledge that part of the quote would detract from your argument. So you just ignore that part and keep spewing your man hating drivel. You can not be reasoned with. I just couldn't handle it anymore.

 

 

I could give you countless examples from your blog. I would have to go back and read it again though, and it's not worth it. lilltempest hit it right on the head though. This is exactly what I was thinking when reading, and the reason I stopped reading your blog.

 

If they help Egwene, they're sexist pigs for not letting her get her face bashed in. If they don't help her, they're sexist pigs for not caring about her.

 

 

These poor characters can't win.