Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY
sonjaruff

How Sanderson changed the naration

Recommended Posts

Brandon has also mentioned that there are holes. The notes might say what has to happen, but they don't say how. They might give and end point, but not how to get there. So I don't know what all the gaps he had to fill are, but I do know that there were gaps. That Sanderson did have to put things together. Interpret character motivations. Also, no-one is claiming that taking more time automatically leads to a better book, only that in this case things were rushed, and that had more time been taken they could have dealt with some of the problems. Saying "RJ would definitely have approved of the way things are done" is just as much a mistake as "RJ would never do it like that".

 

I see your point. I suppose the way I look at it is: RJ says X and Y needs to happen, Sanderson makes sure X and Y happens, I then feel it's what RJ wanted. I don't think as much about the details in getting from X to Y, as long as we get there in a believable fashion, which to me Sanderson did. Obviously there are style differences and things are condensed based on what RJ probably would have done, but it still feels like the WoT to me and at the end of the day, if Harriet approves it and pushes it out the door I can only assume it's telling the story that RJ wanted to tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree with 2riversfan out of the books Sutree listed above I have only read, Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell and hated it.

So even though it is supposedly critically acclaimed, its not my cup of tea and no matter how many arty farty lit critics try to tell me otherwise will never rank anywhere near WoT.

 

I'm no authority on great writing, but have been reading Fantasy/syfi a long time, so I'd ask if fantasy authors are not snubbed why no honours for, Feist, Herbert, Gemmell and Wolfe. It seems to me that certain books get the top awards because of the way there written(which might not be to everyone's liking, but is lapped up by the arty types) and not for strength of the story, if so RJ would be among that list mentioned above(by Sutree).

 

These posts are just serving to back up the point I made earlier, the comments from you and 2riversfan say a lot about personnel preference and very little about RJ's skill as a writer. I made it quite clear that I prefer reading RJ to Pynchon, but it in no way means he is the more talented author. There are a number of things that go in to judging someone's work of which critical acclaim(Herbert & Wolfe both had their share) and awards are just one part. I gave those answers in relation to someone asking what "validates" an author. Making dismissive comments towards "arty" types or "elitists" doesn't help your cause in the slightest.

 

I'm not interested in what a few elitist think, how many of the above authors have sites like DM.

 

It is a fallacy to appeal to an author's popularity in judging their skill. Stephanie Meyer has far more "sites like DM" than the WoT. Does that mean she is a better author than RJ?

 

 

You misunderstand me, which is entirely my fault as I expressed myself poorly.

I know the difference between popularity and talent (I only have to watch the X factor to be reminded).

The point I was trying to make is that, it seems to me that RJ and other authors in the genre don't get the credit they deserve IMO, down to a few elitist' who seem to prize prose above world building and imagination, not that I think RJ' prose was bad or repetitive (as some have said). Its just that peoples opinions differ on what makes a good author. I have always been more interested in the story rather than the quality of the writing (unless bad writing gets in the way of the story), but it seems to me the reverse is true for some critics.

John Lennon was hardly the best musician in the world, but, he could write a hell of a song.

RJ was not the best writer, but, he could tell a hell of a story.

Edited by damandred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I think RJ is a great story-teller and world builder.

 

He's a good writer, there's no doubt, but he's not a great novelist like Tolstoy or Dostoevsky(but then who is). After I read those authors, among others, it really opened my eyes as to how other authors relate.

 

I like RJ, but look at his writing through a non-biased approach by taking the fan in me out of it. I absolutely love the story of WoT, but realistically know it's not an all time great piece of work of writing(I'm sure it's up there in fantasy).

 

So my point is, I see a difference between RJ and BS, but it's not like the difference between a good author and a great author.

 

Personally, I enjoyed tGS and ToM more than some of the RJ books, just because they were so much more to the point and so much happened. I haven't reread them yet though, so I'll be going a bit more slowly this time around.

Edited by YoungKing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've noticed Sanderson uses the word "creature" a lot, and also trousers, whereas Jordan usually said breeches. That's not a criticism, btw, just more on point with the initial topic (what are the differences between them, as opposed to who is better).

 

I do love RJ's writing style, but he does tend to be redundant with a few things. Certain descriptions are almost verbatim between books. That's an observation, not a judgement, especially since I understand the reasoning behind it. It makes sure that our vision of certain characters are persistent, and it's used as a refresher if you assume someone hasn't reread the series after each book.

 

The ones I joke about the most with my friends would be Lan's description--news flash! His face looks like it was carved from stony planes and angles and his eyes are like blue ice--and also the description of Min's viewings. Did you know that sometimes Min can see auras and images around people? She doesn't always know what they mean, sometimes she does, and they always come true. For example, and this is, oh, just off the top of my head...she can look at two people who have never even met and know that one day they'll be married!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've noticed Sanderson uses the word "creature" a lot, and also trousers, whereas Jordan usually said breeches. That's not a criticism, btw, just more on point with the initial topic (what are the differences between them, as opposed to who is better).

 

I do love RJ's writing style, but he does tend to be redundant with a few things. Certain descriptions are almost verbatim between books. That's an observation, not a judgement, especially since I understand the reasoning behind it. It makes sure that our vision of certain characters are persistent, and it's used as a refresher if you assume someone hasn't reread the series after each book.

 

The ones I joke about the most with my friends would be Lan's description--news flash! His face looks like it was carved from stony planes and angles and his eyes are like blue ice--and also the description of Min's viewings. Did you know that sometimes Min can see auras and images around people? She doesn't always know what they mean, sometimes she does, and they always come true. For example, and this is, oh, just off the top of my head...she can look at two people who have never even met and know that one day they'll be married!

 

Thank you for this post! this really hit my original point.

I am gratefull for all the "plot gartification" we are gatting now, and I totally get that no one can ore would copy s.o.s original writing style but there are differences and being geeky and pasionate <i like to point them out.

 

I also notices trousers vs, breeches.

But didn't Lans description change, though I couldn't tell when: In the beginning he was always looking like "he was being carved from stone" the planes and angles happen later, and I remember noticeing them to happen. But was this a Sanderson change or before? I coudn't recall.

 

What I really do love about Jordan is his originality and being right on to the point with descriptions, like this on:

(Mat having dance down the staff of an in in "Lord of Chaos": On of the older serving maids was rubing her food, leaning against a wall, but the rest was looking at him, all bright eyed and bushy tailed.

Just love it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a literature expert. I just like to read good stories. WOT has been one of the most awesome tales I've ever had the good fortune of reading. I'm thankful BS agreed to take up this task & I think he's done an amazing job. If he flubbed something here or there I've been too engrossed in reading & re-reading TGS & TOM. While reading these books I never once found myself thinking "RJ would be mad at this" or "What was BS thinking when he used that phrase?" I've been neck deep in the story & loving every sentence. The battles in the White Tower were fantastic! Rand's conversion on top of Dragonmount, Perrin...EVERYTHING BS has done with RJ's notes & such is great story telling to me.

 

I just pray the Lord let's me live till next January when aMOL is out so I/we finally learn how the story ends.

 

Peace :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taking into account all the various factors involved with getting someone else to finish a massive series, I think we are getting the best possible results. Which is frustrating, because TGS, in particular, has issues, but we are stuck with it for all its good and bad points. I suppose they could choose to revisit it and do a revised author's edition, but I really doubt that's in the cards.

 

I don't mean that TGS and TOM were masterpieces. They have their issues, which have been well-rehearsed in this and other threads. Lots of us have read all of Brandon's other books, and I believe he's capable of better work.

 

I believe those in charge just assumed things would go smoothly, and they didn't take precautions that, in hindsight, seem obvious. With a new writer taking the reins of a massive (and massively popular) series, the book should have been pored over by a large group of early readers (WOT fans) who were specifically looking at continuity, character voice, tone, and anything else that is crucial to the feel of a series. If one person says there's a problem, that's just their opinion, but if a bunch of people say it, there's something that needs fixing. Those who did work on it were apparently too few in number and too close to the writing process, and things went unfixed.

 

With enough time, I really believe Brandon could have ironed out the problems with Mat and the other issues. He has the skill and the passion, he just didn't have the time.

 

The whole hubbub about splitting the book and the unrealistic release dates compounded the problem. They should have taken 6-12 more months to finish TGS.

 

They should have done what they are doing with AMOL, but they didn't. Someone (Shigeru Miyamoto?) said something along the lines of "nobody will remember if a game is late, but they will remember forever if it is bad," and I think it's absolutely applicable here. I think this is an excellent example of why taking the time to do it right is the better path.

 

I devoured both books and loved them. I don't think TGS or TOM are bad, but they could have been better if more time had been allowed, and that's the part that gets me. We would have forgiven them for taking an extra year, and we would have had better books to take with us through our lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taking into account all the various factors involved with getting someone else to finish a massive series, I think we are getting the best possible results. Which is frustrating, because TGS, in particular, has issues, but we are stuck with it for all its good and bad points. I suppose they could choose to revisit it and do a revised author's edition, but I really doubt that's in the cards.

 

I don't mean that TGS and TOM were masterpieces. They have their issues, which have been well-rehearsed in this and other threads. Lots of us have read all of Brandon's other books, and I believe he's capable of better work.

 

I believe those in charge just assumed things would go smoothly, and they didn't take precautions that, in hindsight, seem obvious. With a new writer taking the reins of a massive (and massively popular) series, the book should have been pored over by a large group of early readers (WOT fans) who were specifically looking at continuity, character voice, tone, and anything else that is crucial to the feel of a series. If one person says there's a problem, that's just their opinion, but if a bunch of people say it, there's something that needs fixing. Those who did work on it were apparently too few in number and too close to the writing process, and things went unfixed.

 

With enough time, I really believe Brandon could have ironed out the problems with Mat and the other issues. He has the skill and the passion, he just didn't have the time.

 

The whole hubbub about splitting the book and the unrealistic release dates compounded the problem. They should have taken 6-12 more months to finish TGS.

 

They should have done what they are doing with AMOL, but they didn't. Someone (Shigeru Miyamoto?) said something along the lines of "nobody will remember if a game is late, but they will remember forever if it is bad," and I think it's absolutely applicable here. I think this is an excellent example of why taking the time to do it right is the better path.

 

I devoured both books and loved them. I don't think TGS or TOM are bad, but they could have been better if more time had been allowed, and that's the part that gets me. We would have forgiven them for taking an extra year, and we would have had better books to take with us through our lives.

 

 

 

Great post! Well said!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taking into account all the various factors involved with getting someone else to finish a massive series, I think we are getting the best possible results. Which is frustrating, because TGS, in particular, has issues, but we are stuck with it for all its good and bad points. I suppose they could choose to revisit it and do a revised author's edition, but I really doubt that's in the cards.

 

I don't mean that TGS and TOM were masterpieces. They have their issues, which have been well-rehearsed in this and other threads. Lots of us have read all of Brandon's other books, and I believe he's capable of better work.

 

I believe those in charge just assumed things would go smoothly, and they didn't take precautions that, in hindsight, seem obvious. With a new writer taking the reins of a massive (and massively popular) series, the book should have been pored over by a large group of early readers (WOT fans) who were specifically looking at continuity, character voice, tone, and anything else that is crucial to the feel of a series. If one person says there's a problem, that's just their opinion, but if a bunch of people say it, there's something that needs fixing. Those who did work on it were apparently too few in number and too close to the writing process, and things went unfixed.

 

With enough time, I really believe Brandon could have ironed out the problems with Mat and the other issues. He has the skill and the passion, he just didn't have the time.

 

The whole hubbub about splitting the book and the unrealistic release dates compounded the problem. They should have taken 6-12 more months to finish TGS.

 

They should have done what they are doing with AMOL, but they didn't. Someone (Shigeru Miyamoto?) said something along the lines of "nobody will remember if a game is late, but they will remember forever if it is bad," and I think it's absolutely applicable here. I think this is an excellent example of why taking the time to do it right is the better path.

 

I devoured both books and loved them. I don't think TGS or TOM are bad, but they could have been better if more time had been allowed, and that's the part that gets me. We would have forgiven them for taking an extra year, and we would have had better books to take with us through our lives.

 

To be honest, I thought TGS (with the exception of the verb ''Saidering'', Mat and Talmanes' opening duet, and Sulin/Perrin/Tam geography/timeline error) was FANTASTIC, tight, and VERY well done.

 

TOM was the one that...well, the finished product still gives me nightmares.

 

jmo

 

 

Fish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My biggest gripe isn't with the character portrayal, but with the introduction of the word 'idiot' along with the changing of 'blood and ashes' or 'blood and bloody ashes' into 'bloody ashes.'

 

My big Mat gripe is how the ashanderei turned into a vanilla as f--- naginata, wooden haft included. The characterisation in Sanderson's books I choose to interpret as an overcompensation for being married.

 

I forgave Rand's sudden paradigm shift when he dealt out the one handed pwn; also figuring that as a worthy apology for his new Lightvision.

 

Egwene has always been a total [string of expeletives] and I was happy with how Sanderson dealt to stage one of the Rand/Egwene meeting. On a related note, I also feel that Sanderson has returned to the roots of the male/female passive conflict. By this I mean it's back to the women and men both being convinced only they can be right, but the women just don't get it (with the exception of a rare few.)

 

Sanderson's Perrin doesn't quite feel the same, but reads right. By this I mean I feel like we missed a step in his growth.

 

That's all I can think of issue wise for me. Sorry if any of this has been covered but eight pages is a lot to ask in one sitting. >.>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Introduction of the word idiot? Revim, the word was used throughout the series - first in EotW. Unless BS has a time machine, I don't think he can be blamed for introducing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm in the same boat as you, been reading this series forever, and I have no problems whatsoever with the Sanderson books. It's time to finish this story and move on with it. I don't mind the lack of description or epicness that RJ usually brings to scenes... it's great for a while, but after 11 books of that we all know what the world looks like, what the dresses look like, etc etc. Get on with the story.

 

As for people acting "out of character," I can only surmise that what people are doing in the Sanderson books are exactly what RJ wanted them to do. So Cadsuane has been described as remarkably adaptable. That's great, but everyone has a breaking point, no matter how patient or old you are. And to me, I felt Cadsuane hit her breaking point with the whole Tam deal. I didn't find it out of character at all, it didn't make me pause and exclaim "that's not what RJ would do!" and if it's there in the published book, even after Harriet and Team Jordan have done their thing, then it must have been what RJ wanted. He was detailed enough in the actual writing, I'm sure he was detailed enough in the notes he left when it came to all the important plot points, of which this was one.

 

I really don't see the point in picking apart every sentence BS has written and comparing it to RJ's. Enjoy the ending. It's the only one we're going to get.

 

Precisely the point I've been trying to make forever around here. Jordan lacked subtlety and he lacked imagination. He beat us over the head, time and time again, with nearly the identical phrases used to convey nearly identical situations. We know Nynaeve tugs her braid when she gets angry or frustrated. Don't show us Nynaeve tugging her braid some more, find some new way to convey her state of mind.

 

But, Jordan never did.

 

Sanderson gives us a fresh look at Nynaeve. He doesn't abandon all we know about her but he does supplement it, and expand it with new behaviors, rather than the same tired ones we've gotten forever. He gives us back a set of people not just the caricatures they had become over the previous eleven books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sanderson gives us a fresh look at Nynaeve. He doesn't abandon all we know about her but he does supplement it, and expand it with new behaviors, rather than the same tired ones we've gotten forever. He gives us back a set of people not just the caricatures they had become over the previous eleven books.

 

You have got to be joking. Brandon has brought some new things to the series but better characterization is most assuredly not one of them. RJ did a fabulous job with Nynaeve(and no pulling her braid too many times doesn't take away from that as it has nothing to do with the depth of her character) and Brandon at times is anything but subtle with his caricature versions. This is one of the most commented upon complaints in the fandom when talking about TGS and ToM so I really don't see how you can attempt to just flip that around. If I didn't know your previous posts better I would think you were trolling.

Edited by Suttree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm in the same boat as you, been reading this series forever, and I have no problems whatsoever with the Sanderson books. It's time to finish this story and move on with it. I don't mind the lack of description or epicness that RJ usually brings to scenes... it's great for a while, but after 11 books of that we all know what the world looks like, what the dresses look like, etc etc. Get on with the story.

 

As for people acting "out of character," I can only surmise that what people are doing in the Sanderson books are exactly what RJ wanted them to do. So Cadsuane has been described as remarkably adaptable. That's great, but everyone has a breaking point, no matter how patient or old you are. And to me, I felt Cadsuane hit her breaking point with the whole Tam deal. I didn't find it out of character at all, it didn't make me pause and exclaim "that's not what RJ would do!" and if it's there in the published book, even after Harriet and Team Jordan have done their thing, then it must have been what RJ wanted. He was detailed enough in the actual writing, I'm sure he was detailed enough in the notes he left when it came to all the important plot points, of which this was one.

 

I really don't see the point in picking apart every sentence BS has written and comparing it to RJ's. Enjoy the ending. It's the only one we're going to get.

 

Precisely the point I've been trying to make forever around here. Jordan lacked subtlety and he lacked imagination. He beat us over the head, time and time again, with nearly the identical phrases used to convey nearly identical situations. We know Nynaeve tugs her braid when she gets angry or frustrated. Don't show us Nynaeve tugging her braid some more, find some new way to convey her state of mind.

 

But, Jordan never did.

 

Sanderson gives us a fresh look at Nynaeve. He doesn't abandon all we know about her but he does supplement it, and expand it with new behaviors, rather than the same tired ones we've gotten forever. He gives us back a set of people not just the caricatures they had become over the previous eleven books.

 

 

So nynaeve tugs her braid. Its called a character trait, lots of people have them. I tap my foot when nervous or anxious. I like my characters to stay consistent. Nynaeve pulling her braid, Elayne raising her chin, Thom smoothing his moustache all trademarks and all tell the reader exactly what that character is feeling at the time, anger, amusement ect.

And RJ lacked imagination. You sure?

The man only dreamed up the most epic fantasy series of all time. Rich in detail and history.

Lacking imagination seriously are you for real?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Introduction of the word idiot? Revim, the word was used throughout the series - first in EotW. Unless BS has a time machine, I don't think he can be blamed for introducing it.

 

Okay, I may have been mistaken on the word idiot. I don't have the books handy to reference as my uncle is borrowing them. If I am then IDK why, but that word jarred horribly with me when I read it. It seemed that I recalled only the word fool. What I was trying to express was how the few minor inconsistancies with the culture and setting I found more irritating than characters who by this time we all know at least as well as our own friends might not be as fleshed out as I can fill in the gaps. A sudden shock breaks immersion though and for me that means I take a bit of time to get back to full enjoyment. I'll keep an eye out for 'idiot' on my next re-read, which may lessen or remove the jolt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jordan's descriptions aren't that good. Compare them to someone who is excellent at writing evocatively and painting picture with words like Mervyn Peake or Patricia McKillip, and that's obvious.

 

Frankly, anyone who considers RJ's prose to be anything below top tier has no idea what they're talking about IMO. I have read many other authors and there are many distinct differences in style to consider, but I have yet to read an author that can paint words on the page with such a wide ranging vocabulary as RJ while maintaining such a fluid and immersive story.

Are you really saying that Jordan's prose is as good as that of writers like Gene Wolfe, McKillip, Guy Kay, Le Guin (if we sticking to fantasy only). Then I have to disagree completely. He was good, but he's simply not in the same league as the very best fantasy writers in terms of prose.

Disagree completely. RJ avoided purple, individualistic prose, but his approach to 'generic prose' is high art. If you want to make this kind of assertion, then you need to at least provide examples and show us what makes GGK better than RJ. You're stating your personal opinion as if it's objective fact. I could give you example after example of why Brandon's prose doesn't make the mark—overuse of full stop, overuse of certain descriptive or action words like 'continued', etc.—but since Brandon acknowledges it's a weakness for him, I don't see the point. But can you do the same?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thing I noticed, and this might actually be a minor error as opposed to difference in wording/style, is in TGS Sanderson sometimes mentions the Amyrlin's shawl when he means stole. Specifically things like "stripping Elaida of the shawl" and other contexts like that. Although I only noticed it twice. You could argue that he means stripping her of being Aes Sedai entirely, but I think he meant specifically the Amyrlin's stole. I believe the other time I noticed it it was Egwene thinking about since she gained the shawl, and since she was never Aes Sedai (except by virtue of being Amyrlin...she was never raised to an Ajah) he probably meant the Amyrlin's stole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether you consider Jordan "Great' or merely "good", one thing you have to give him is that there is always one jewel of a scene in each of the books.

 

Just as, if you're being at all objective, you have to admit that there are also long passages that are at best torpid.

 

Reading Jordan is kinda like Sunday Dinner when you were a kid. You don't just get to eat the entree, you've gotta eat all of the vegetables, too. Even the "icky" ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whether you consider Jordan "Great' or merely "good", one thing you have to give him is that there is always one jewel of a scene in each of the books.

 

Just as, if you're being at all objective, you have to admit that there are also long passages that are at best torpid.

I can't recall any personally. I'm a bit of a skimmer when I read, though. Some people can't read without reading every word. Out of those, some like RJ's descriptive, 'cinematic' approach. Some don't. But in either case, I'd be interested to see how anything in the WoT can objectively be described as 'torpid'.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmm. The only truly dragging plot I remember is Nynaeve and Elayne's journey to Salidar. Even Perrin's CoT stuff didn't bore me. In truth I've always found that its precisely in the slower chapters that Jordan hides the most intriguing things.

 

And too the point must be made that Jordan's cinematic writing is what enables us to emerge ourselves so fully in the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Introduction of the word idiot? Revim, the word was used throughout the series - first in EotW. Unless BS has a time machine, I don't think he can be blamed for introducing it.

 

Okay, I may have been mistaken on the word idiot. I don't have the books handy to reference as my uncle is borrowing them. If I am then IDK why, but that word jarred horribly with me when I read it. It seemed that I recalled only the word fool. What I was trying to express was how the few minor inconsistancies with the culture and setting I found more irritating than characters who by this time we all know at least as well as our own friends might not be as fleshed out as I can fill in the gaps. A sudden shock breaks immersion though and for me that means I take a bit of time to get back to full enjoyment. I'll keep an eye out for 'idiot' on my next re-read, which may lessen or remove the jolt.

There are many examples similar to yours - people think that something is a Brandonism, that RJ would never use that word, but then evidence proves them wrong. Sanderson might use some words more often than RJ was inclined to (tempest is a frequently cited example), but some things that jar people are actually in line with words RJ would have used. Not all, but some.

 

 

Reading Jordan is kinda like Sunday Dinner when you were a kid. You don't just get to eat the entree, you've gotta eat all of the vegetables, too. Even the "icky" ones.
When I was a kid, I didn't eat anything I didn't want to. You'll never get anywhere in life if you let your parents push you around like that. I also don't have to read any passage of RJ's that I don't want to. No torpid prose or icky vegetables for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jordan's descriptions aren't that good. Compare them to someone who is excellent at writing evocatively and painting picture with words like Mervyn Peake or Patricia McKillip, and that's obvious.

 

Frankly, anyone who considers RJ's prose to be anything below top tier has no idea what they're talking about IMO. I have read many other authors and there are many distinct differences in style to consider, but I have yet to read an author that can paint words on the page with such a wide ranging vocabulary as RJ while maintaining such a fluid and immersive story.

Are you really saying that Jordan's prose is as good as that of writers like Gene Wolfe, McKillip, Guy Kay, Le Guin (if we sticking to fantasy only). Then I have to disagree completely. He was good, but he's simply not in the same league as the very best fantasy writers in terms of prose.

Disagree completely. RJ avoided purple, individualistic prose, but his approach to 'generic prose' is high art. If you want to make this kind of assertion, then you need to at least provide examples and show us what makes GGK better than RJ. You're stating your personal opinion as if it's objective fact. I could give you example after example of why Brandon's prose doesn't make the mark—overuse of full stop, overuse of certain descriptive or action words like 'continued', etc.—but since Brandon acknowledges it's a weakness for him, I don't see the point. But can you do the same?

 

Also wanted to point out that Brandon makes it pretty clear where he stands in this area...

 

 

BRANDON SANDERSON

That's more of a prose issue than anything else, though—an area where RJ was very strong and I'm relatively weak

 

And too the point must be made that Jordan's cinematic writing is what enables us to emerge ourselves so fully in the story.

 

 

Which is exactly what makes the WoT epic for multiple rereads. Sadly TGS and ToM are two books in which that is very difficult to do.

Edited by Suttree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmm. The only truly dragging plot I remember is Nynaeve and Elayne's journey to Salidar. Even Perrin's CoT stuff didn't bore me. In truth I've always found that its precisely in the slower chapters that Jordan hides the most intriguing things.

 

And too the point must be made that Jordan's cinematic writing is what enables us to emerge ourselves so fully in the story.

 

You're making a very good point here. I find a lot of the female perspective chapters tend to drag on, I think this is because I don't entirely agree with their view; Nynaeve and Moiraine are the only non-Aiel female characters I can stomach in large doses.

 

Jordan took a more neutral view than I and gave all his primary and secondary characters equal opportunity to live, breathe think and feel. I believe this broadens his appeal by allowing people to get in the heads of their personal favourites. I agree that his cinematic approach, as you coined it, allows for this to happen without looking like filler - unless you really dislike the central character to a given piece of narrative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't speak with any authority on who managed it, but I found Rand's character development to be UNBELIEVABLY GOOD in TGS. Those scenes were SO deep inside his head, in his skin, that it sent chills down my spine. The scene where he's leaving Bandar Eban, and all the food has spoiled... *shudders at scene's power*

 

Nyneave was also done wonderfully in the last few books. As for the problems with character in ToM, that felt more like it had been rushed, the editing/rewriting process cut unfortunately short, than that it had been written badly. Personally, my biggest disappointments were that Mat's triumphs fell flat to me emotionally. Once again, I can't say who wrote the scenes, but an overall thrown-together feel pervaded it. I felt that another six months would have brought a masterpiece like I, personally, found in TGS.

 

Oh, and I hope Rand isn't completely Zen-master Rand inside his own head.

Edited by Sephie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't speak with any authority on who managed it, but I found Rand's character development to be UNBELIEVABLY GOOD in TGS. Those scenes were SO deep inside his head, in his skin, that it sent chills down my spine. The scene where he's leaving Bandar Eban, and all the food has spoiled... *shudders at scene's power*

 

Nyneave was also done wonderfully in the last few books. As for the problems with character in ToM, that felt more like it had been rushed, the editing/rewriting process cut unfortunately short, than that it had been written badly. Personally, my biggest disappointments were that Mat's triumphs fell flat to me emotionally. Once again, I can't say who wrote the scenes, but an overall thrown-together feel pervaded it. I felt that another six months would have brought a masterpiece like I, personally, found in TGS.

 

Oh, and I hope Rand isn't completely Zen-master Rand inside his own head.

 

This is a great post - I agree with every word. Nynaeve has been portrayed TREMENDOUSLY in TGS/TOM and since she is my second-favorite character (behind Mat), I think I would probably be the first to scream bloody murder if I felt like she had been ''messed up.'' ... Again, we don't KNOW what was written by who in every instance, though we do know SOME things, but since Brandon has said most of Rand in these books is HIS writing and Nynaeve is in his company most of the time, I feel like I have to compliment Brandon on his portrayal of Nyn.

 

I also felt like TGS was a FAR SUPERIOR book than TOM in almost every way. In TOM, I also felt like most of the Perrin/Mat scenes - at least those from Perrin's POV - (as Brandon has confirmed that he wrote all the Perrin POV's and RJ wrote MOST of the Mat POVs) had waaaaay too much of a ''Golly Gee!!! Gee Whiz!!!'' feel to them.

 

I'm sorry, but I just don't understand what is so hard to understand about a preference for Jordan's more experienced, patient, layered, seasoned, venerable, subtle, deft touch - especially in pivotal moments or ''Payoff'' scenes.

 

 

Fish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...