Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY
Luckers

Thisguy's Topic on Brandon's Work

Recommended Posts

Rand certainly feels like she blackmailed them into it. Oh look, your leader is crazy, you are traitors (if she said that, I don't know if she did because how could she know), nobody will take you in except me. If you think that's not underhanded manipulation, I definitely do. They most definitely did not come up to her to ask to become Warders and they were sworn to Rand's service.

 

As to her being in character I followed that up with the remainder of the context by saying; to quote "But, I have never invested in her character enough to care if she feels off in any given situation."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you think that's not underhanded manipulation, I definitely do. They most definitely did not come up to her to ask to become Warders and they were sworn to Rand's service.

The problem isn't that I disagree that this would be a type of manipulation, it's that you've provided no evidence that she did anything of the sort, or indeed that she was even involved in their being Bonded by three (or was it four? Merise took Jahar, Daigian took Eben, Corele took Flinn; am I missing anyone?) different sisters.

 

As to her being in character I followed that up with the remainder of the context by saying; to quote "But, I have never invested in her character enough to care if she feels off in any given situation."

That you clarified you weren't invested in her lot did nothing to suggest you don't find her in-character, simply that you didn't put much stock in your own take of the situation. In fact, it seemed to suggest the exact opposite. Why then shouldn't I have commented about that determination? Again, if I misunderstood then I apologize; it's just not clear to me that I have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, heh, I will always, if I know anything about something, speak on the subject, followed by a disclaimer that I am either not an expert, have limited my knowledge in the field to x area or cannot remember my source and it may not be accurate. It keeps me from coming off like Cliff from Cheers :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the last book and lets be honest, people have been complaining about Brandon for years, imo being ungrateful that the series is even being finished

So this came up in another thread and I find this pov both odd and revisionist in nature. First off people have not been complaining about Brandon for "years". In fact upon the release of TgS he was widely praised. Thethings he did well were discussed in detail and for better or worse Brandon was handled with kid gloves. It wasn't until the glow of plot/fan gratification started wearing off and people dove into rereads that the issues become starkly apparent. The quality is so uneven that there is quite literally no way to ignore the problems in any detailed read. Everyone who has spent time here understands that how it went down so I'm not sure why people have been revising things as if he has been attacked from day 1.

 

The second part of the above post is something I find disturbing. Apparently we have reached a point in society where critiquing literature is considered being "ungrateful" to the author. A careful study and analysis is "hating". In this case specifically time and again you see people exhorting others to ignore the problems in the work and just "be happy" we are getting an ending. Art is made to be judged and RJ deserves a hell of a lot better than just getting to the finish line. On a larger level though I fear where we are headed when people approach the issue a they do above, calling into question the validity of people in judging a work of art.

Edited by Suttree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It's the last book and lets be honest, people have been complaining about Brandon for years, imo being ungrateful that the series is even being finished

So this came up in another thread and I find this pov both odd and revisionist in nature. First off people have not been complaining about Brandon for "years". In fact upon the release of TgS he was widely praised. Thethings he did well were discussed in detail and for better or worse Brandon was handled with kid gloves. It wasn't until the glow of plot/fan gratification started wearing off and people dove into rereads that the issues become starkly apparent. The quality is so uneven that there is quite literally no way to ignore the problems in any detailed read. Everyone who has spent time here understands that how it went down so I'm not sure why people have been revising things as if he has been attacked from day 1.

 

The second part of the above post is something I find disturbing. Apparently we have reached a point in society where critiquing literature is considered being "ungrateful" to the author. A careful study and analysis is "hating". In this case specifically time and again you see people exhorting others to ignore the problems in the work and just "be happy" we are getting an ending. Art is made to be judged and RJ deserves a hell of a lot better than just getting to the finish line. On a larger level though I fear where we are headed when people approach the issue a they do above, calling into question the validity of people in judging a work of art.

 

 

I wasn't around for the first bit, so can't comment.

 

Although I disagree with you in places (quite a few based on discussions) about the quality, I agree with you that not being able to critique art is scary - imagine not being able to give an honest opinion on The Da'vinci Code *shudders*.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel Suttree's criticisms of the prose are more substantial than other criticisms of Brandon's contribution. The issues with the prose are what I noticed during my first read. On other criticisms, details from the recently released AMoL chapters made it obvious just how easily continuity errors slip by even Harriet and Team Jordan. And while Sanderson hasn't been perfect, mind, I feel that people tend to assume the worst when evaluating character motivations and behavior (then again, I take a positive view with Jordan's writing in this area as well).

 

While the complaints about prose are still valid, there have been some positive elements. I've seen a number of readers praise Brandon's WoT writing for being more accessible and direct. One thing I noticed about Jordan was how uneven some of the dialog was. One character would ask a question, Jordan would then indulge us with a few paragraphs to a page and a half of descriptions and reflections, then have the other character respond. By that time I occasionally found myself having completely forgotten what the initial question was to begin with, and the response had no cues to remind me. I would be forced to backtrack to the original question again. Aside from that, I don't take issue with Jordan's detailed writing, though I do know many found it to be very obtuse.

Edited by Agitel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 One thing I noticed about Jordan was how uneven some of the dialog was. One character would ask a question, Jordan would then indulge us with a few paragraphs to a page and a half of descriptions and reflections, then have the other character respond. By that time I occasionally found myself having completely forgotten what the initial question was to begin with, and the response had no cues to remind me. I would be forced to backtrack to the original question again. Aside from that, I don't take issue with Jordan's detailed writing, though I do know many found it to be very obtuse.

This most certainly cuts both way however. Here was a great post from Fionwe touching on that...

 

 

Fionwe

Reading her PoV, one thing strikes me. The biggest flaw to Brandon's writing is that when characters start talking, we stop seeing their points of view. With Jordan, these would constantly intermingle, giving us a character's PoV while they were conversing. This added dept to those conversations, but more importantly, this was the way sarcasm or humor would often be injected into the story. I think one reason why Mat fails is that we don't have this constant interplay of thought and conversation. Its blocks of one followed by blocks of other.

With someone like Egwene, it simply makes her seem less intelligent. Usually, if she'd heard Elayne say "let the DO be freed", she'd have a lot of thoughts about it. Here, we have to infer it, and that's not exactly done in a good way, especially since we rarely get to read characters physical reactions, facial expressions, etc. either, when they talk.

Here's an example of what I mean. The bolded parts are my additions:

Quote

“Thank you very much for the advice,” Elayne said, “which I will ignore, as I ignored Birgitte when she said the same thing. Mother, what is it you wished to discuss?”

Egwene handed over the letter she had been working on.

Elayne scanned the top of the letter. “To Rand?” Elayne (she) asked.

“You have a different perspective on him than I. Tell me what you think of this letter. I might not send it to him. I haven’t decided yet.”

Elayne's face gave nothing away as she read the letter. She looked serene. As an Aes Sedai should. As a Queen should. How would she react to this? Egwene placed much trust on Elayne. The woman was in love with Rand, but Egwene trusted her to place the rationality of their arguments above her feelings. At least, she added to herself, I hope I can. 

“The tone is . . . forceful,” Elayne noted. She did not seem surprised.

“He doesn’t seem to respond to anything else.” Egwene could well remember their arguments as they grew up in Emond's Field. Him saying the most infuriating things. Her trying to make sense. At least, that was the way of it most of the time.

They had thought they would marry, then, yet that hadn't stopped them from rubbing each other the wrong way every so often. Now... now we stand as leaders of the world. An ancient man in the mind of a boy, and a girl bearing a title almost as ancient. They couldn't walk away from each other in a huff this time.

After a moment of reading Elayne lowered the letter. “Perhaps we should simply let him do as he wishes.”

“Break the seals?” Egwene asked, startled. “Release the Dark One?”

“Why not?”, Elayne asked, as if asking why there should be no rain from clouds.

“Light, Elayne!, Egwene said, troubled. If her closest friends doubted her course, what chance did she have of convincing Rand? And Perrin too, as if one mule headed stubborn man weren't enough. All they needed was for Mat to appear, and the entire lot of them could talk sense till they were hoarse, and nothing would change.

“It has to happen, doesn’t it?” Elayne asked. “I mean, the Dark One’s going to escape. He’s practically free already.”

Egwene rubbed her temples, thinking. She chose her words carefully. Elayne's point was not without merit. Perhaps if she had she not had that dream before Rand came, she would have seen things differently too. But now... now she knew. This was not instinct. Not even just the Dream, which she hadn't even revealed to the Wise Ones. The Tower was a treasure trove of obscure knowledge, and on this issue, she had found plenty of useful nuggets. Time to see if they were worth anything.

“There is a difference between touching the world and being free. During the War of Power, the Dark One was never truly released into the world. The Bore let him touch it, but that was resealed before he could escape. If the Dark One had entered the world, the Wheel itself would have been broken. Here, I brought this to show you.”

 

Edited by Suttree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that Brandon could inject more POV into some of his dialog scenes. I appreciate getting POV feedback during dialog, and Jordan typically was fine at that, but there were a distracting number of cases in which he took it too far, particularly in the later books of the series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, I agree with fionwe on this one. The dialogue might've been broken by the PoV's, but that's because it wasn't the important bit; the PoV's were. Still, I don't recall having to backtrack myself (which doesn't mean it never happened, only that I don't share in the impression that the writing was conducive to that), except in that notorious TEotW chapter (which, by the way, was by design. Events were a dizzy haze for Rand, and the readers got to experience that first-hand).

As for the rest, easily fixed continuity errors don't bother me that much. "Oh, so it wasn't Sulin after all, big whoop." I become more disturbed where the error is key to enabling a plot turn, which in truth simply doesn't work. For examples of that, see the Dream ter'angreal in ToM and linking-rules in AMoL2 (and, I very much suspect, the non-Seanchan assassins of AMoL11). And, might I add, I don't think AMoL just goes to prove how inescapable those are. If I'm able to list several such instances in each chapter I read, I tend to assume Maria could've too. More than that, I assume beta readers could've, given the chance.

There's simply no excuse for the amount of these errors, not when people who could've remedied this are by no means in short supply, and especially not when a point was made that TeamJ are taking their time this time around exactly for the purpose of "getting AMoL just right". I don't expect to be on Harriet's call-sheet myself, being a non-entity, but surely someone who isn't could've filled that function much better. I take no issues with Luckers's absence from it as well. Theresa would've been brilliant at it, but I can see why that might not have worked either. What about Linda? Matt? Jennifer? Bob? Leigh (who, might I add, is a Tor employee)? The list goes on and on.

Edited by Barid Bel Medar
whoops, sorry, something messed up, I returned your post to it's original state :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be a misunderstanding or misconception in regards to what people are unhappy about. 

 

Yes, there are are small portion who will get extremely annoyed with small continuity things like the Sulin example as listed, and there are some who just don't like Brandon for whatever reason.

 

However, I believe that the majority of the critics of the work here are on very important issues. 

 

I am with Yoniy0 on this, things like Sulin popping up in the wrong place don't bother me. The timeline in ToM didn't bother me too much either. Yes, it was a giant mess and could have been fixed, but the plot itself didn't really suffer all that much for it. It might confuse chronologists as to when things are supposed to have taken place, but we have basic time markers that give us approximates. Nothing about the plot is seriously compromised. 

 

Of course, these things are brought up as points in debate, but very few people actually hold it against Brandon. It is more like "hey, there's an error here, do you mind fixing it up?" 

 

Others seem to take that as some kind of attack on Brandon and Team Jordan, when in fact it is just (and I say again, usually) pointing out an error, nothing personal. 

 

Again, I am with Yoniy0 that it IS annoying and very disheartening when major plot points are compromised by errors, like the examples given above, the dream ter'angreal, the linking mistake etc... 

 

Now I won't speak for anyone else, but I can even give a bit of leeway for the dream ter'angreal mistake (even though what Yoniy0 said is completely correct). ToM was a rushed job that Team Jordan and Brandon later regretted, that's fair enough. It was disconcerting to be sure, but plenty of us gave Brandon and TJ the benefit of the doubt and let it slide. 

 

Now, this is why you are seeing harsher criticism with the aMoL previews, if you have not been following the tGS and ToM reactions (which were at first very positive and a LOT of benefit of the doubt was given. A lot of mistakes and quirks were looked over.)

 

It is because Brandon and Team Jordan took an extra year and a bit to write and edit aMoL because they wanted to get it right. They delayed the release for more than 6 months for this purpose, and I myself would not mind if they had taken longer if that's what was needed. I was and am all for a delay to make aMoL the best book it can be. 

 

However, when you get major errors like the Linking incident, which goes against the rules of the world that have been established - and your average member who has nothing to do with Tor, Brandon or Team Jordan can pick it up as soon as it is read, yeah, people are going to get annoyed and worried about the quality.  

 

It gets people thinking, if such an obvious error wasn't picked up - what does this mean for the rest of aMoL? Are we going to have Rand channel saidar and learn to fly - or have men start Linking on their own without a woman present - or have Trollocs start pouring through Gateways - will we see Mat burning Atium and anticipating every movement of the enemy? Now obviously these examples (especially the last one :tongue:) are a bit of hyperbole on my part, but the point remains the same. 

 

People are going to start to wonder and rightfully so. 

 

 

And before the whole "at least we are getting a book" stunt is pulled, I will state: Nobody is ungrateful, that is an absurd notion that is used by those who haven't read the actual criticism itself. 

 

But if we see Trollocs suddenly using Gateways or Myrddraal starting to Channel and men linking together without women, I would much rather it not be written at all and just have an outline of the conclusion published. 

Edited by Barid Bel Medar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

Knocked it out of the park Barid. Excellent post all around and part of that is exactly what bothered me  about the AMoL excerpts so far. We were told they needed extra time, we were told Brandon was changing his writing process to address the unpolished feel, we were told he worked so hard on Mat and got over those problems, and most importantly we were told that as the last book upon which RJ's legacy will be judged they have to get "AMoL right". I obviously would never make a blanket statement based on the pre release materials but the results so far have not been encouraging on every one of the points listed above. Despite this I still hold out hope that Brandon did put in the extra time and that this will be his best work yet in the WoT world. As irrational as that might be I need to believe things will get better. Time will tell...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The dream ter'angreal mistake was minor. I won't say the same about the linking mistake, which was a much larger inconsistency. They are disconcerting, don't get me wrong, but I think we're just reacting differently to them. To me, the fact that the linking mistake got by after so much extra revision time just validates what I've been saying all along about how difficult this is with Jordan, the original author, gone. I don't see this as a personal or professional failing on anybody's part in the project. Of course I wish these mistakes weren't there, but I guess what I'm saying is that I don't find them unacceptable. I'm empathetic to the challenges Team Jordan and Brandon face, and I don't feel anyone has been slacking in trying to make this right. Having inconsistencies such as Sulin, the dream ter'angreal, and even the linking just seem to be inevitable given the circumstances.

 

I can't make such excuses with the prose. I think Brandon is a bit out-of-sorts writing the WoT. Character voices being different is one thing, but some of the writing is just clumsy. And timeline inconsistencies are also something I'd have expected to have been handled better. I also can't understand how they thought jumping back and forth a month in time was acceptable for ToM, either. At least not the way it was done (though this is different than timelines actually being inconsistent). I picked up on what was going on immediately, but it was incredibly jarring.

Edited by Agitel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agitel, I don't feel like you're addressing what's been said. The point I was trying to make wasn't which parts of ToM (and TGS) felt better or worse to me, nor the amount to which I empathise with BS and TeamJ. I didn't even catch the ring thing on my own. It's the fact that mistakes such as this invalidate whole segments of plot; you can't have a battle at the WT without fully-channeling BA. An alternative avenue would had to have been developed and utilized to get them there, and there was simply no way to get around that. It's the same with Pevara's reaction, which is flimsy as things are, but would certainly have stood out as baseless if Linking worked the way it ought to. This is the criteria by which I suggest to judge these things, the resulting warp in plot. Naturally, though, that I think it the correct way to approach the issue doesn't mean anyone else ought to, as well; I would simply like to see if competing approaches are based in something other than personal preferences.

 

And again, you suggest the presence of numerous errors as proof-positive of their inevitability. I wholeheartedly disagree. As I said, suggestions I can make the first time I see the material are certainly within TeamJ's capability of correcting themselves. However, that is subjective, and I acknowledge that fresh eyes do count for something. Which is precisely the reason I can't stand for their decision to forego beta-reading as part of the editorial process this time around. That, I hope you guys will forgive me for saying, isn't trying their best. It's not even doing the project the courtesy it deserves. Just this man's opinion, but not any less valid for all that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agitel, I don't feel like you're addressing what's been said. The point I was trying to make wasn't which parts of ToM (and TGS) felt better or worse to me, nor the amount to which I empathise with BS and TeamJ. I didn't even catch the ring thing on my own. It's the fact that mistakes such as this invalidate whole segments of plot; you can't have a battle at the WT without fully-channeling BA. An alternative avenue would had to have been developed and utilized to get them there, and there was simply no way to get around that. It's the same with Pevara's reaction, which is flimsy as things are, but would certainly have stood out as baseless if Linking worked the way it ought to. This is the criteria by which I suggest to judge these things, the resulting warp in plot. Naturally, though, that I think it the correct way to approach the issue doesn't mean anyone else ought to, as well; I would simply like to see if competing approaches are based in something other than personal preferences.

 

Invalidate whole sections of the plot? I disagree. They are jarring, but really now, the ring issue would have been a non-issue if the modifications to the rings by Elayne and Mesaana had been mentioned in the first edition, with it of course being foreshadowed/built up a bit earlier in the text. The linking issue was larger, but again, it doesn't invalidate her whole reaction. Even if she had initiated the link as planned, she still would have to pass control to Androl because she can't lead any channeling in a circle of one man and one woman, thus relinquishing control to a person that, however logical Pevara may be, she has strong prejudice/anxiety over dealing with. So the plot isn't really warped by either of these inconsistencies, as a slight tweak to the ter'angreal explanation and a correction to the linking, it still would have worked out the same way. I don't see how what I'm saying is any more "personal preference" than what you are. I just don't see these issues as being especially problematic or frustrating as you, nor do I see the inconsistencies as the results of less than their best efforts.

 

 

 

And again, you suggest the presence of numerous errors as proof-positive of their inevitability. I wholeheartedly disagree. As I said, suggestions I can make the first time I see the material are certainly within TeamJ's capability of correcting themselves. However, that is subjective, and I acknowledge that fresh eyes do count for something. Which is precisely the reason I can't stand for their decision to forego beta-reading as part of the editorial process this time around. That, I hope you guys will forgive me for saying, isn't trying their best. It's not even doing the project the courtesy it deserves. Just this man's opinion, but not any less valid for all that.

 

Outside of mathematics, you can't prove things positive. Anyway, it was my understanding that they did do the beta-read. Harriet was initially against the process, not because she doesn't care about the book or was slacking, but just because doing a beta-read is a relatively new phenomenon and has never really been a part of her editing process. This wasn't a matter of approaching the novel half-hazard just to finish it. You're making an incredibly relative argument. They're not obligated to devote the entirety of the rest of their lives towards making this perfect, even if that's what it would take. I'm not going to argue that anything less than that is less than their best effort. Could much more time have improved it? Yeah, I think so. But in the time frame they chose to complete this in I think they gave their best, and I think they made what they thought at the time were the best decisions. Mistakes have been made. I wish they weren't. I'm not going to accuse them of putting in less than their best effort over that, though.

 

People telling me they know secret things about the process and behind-the-scenes information isn't going to cut it for me. Nor do I know whether or not their interpretations of that info are anywhere near correct.

Edited by Agitel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It's the fact that mistakes such as this invalidate whole segments of plot; you can't have a battle at the WT without fully-channeling BA.

That, I hope you guys will forgive me for saying, isn't trying their best. It's not even doing the project the courtesy it deserves.

 

I agree with your whole post, yoni0, and these sections in particular.  There's no way to explain how certain things that are now 'canon' make any sense without invalidating stuff that RJ wrote himself.  It's that already set-up framework that deserves a level of scrutiny that simply wasn't given.  Even if something is 'really cool sounding', if it doesn't work, one must swallow their pride and figure out something that does work.  Of course it isn't easy, but that's the job, is it not?  

 

Even if something's in RJ's outlines, it should be checked against the published text so it's written in a way that fits.  If it's not in his notes and was an idea by someone else, it would do to be triple-checked or quadruple-checked so that it won't contradict the established parameters of the way the world of WoT works.  It's well known that fans of the series are used to looking for anything that looked remotely off-kilter, because it usually actually means something, be it a clue, or a bit of humor, or even an intentional red herring.  But now the well trained fans have trouble 'turning it off' and just let the stuff sit there as obvious as a pillow making a huge mound under the covers of an otherwise perfectly made bed.

 

I know, there are things long established that were disproved by main characters throughout the series, but those moments happened on screen from their PoV, with an explanation of what was happening.  Nyneave curing Logain, for instance was her actively doing it, and the chapter title was even a reference to it happening.  Not an offhand (*Warning* paraphrased with a dash of snarkiness) 'It's a good thing she was able to make perfect dream rings even though she didn't have the original to study anymore and can't even use the thing properly while she's pregnant' or 'I'm over that pregnancy channeling problem even though the Aiel Wise Ones told us that those problems would persist until giving birth, and will almost assuredly get worse until then'.  How sloppy!  Clunky prose is disappointing, of course, but made up plots that are based on invalid premises are unforgivable, IMO.  I knew the story wasn't going to be as fleshed out as before, but now instead of just the skeleton, it's a skeleton with bones from some other animal mixed in to fill it out.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be a misunderstanding or misconception in regards to what people are unhappy about. 

 

Yes, there are are small portion who will get extremely annoyed

Again, I am with Yoniy0 that it IS annoying and very disheartening when major plot points are compromised by errors, like the examples given above, the dream ter'angreal, the linking mistake etc...It is more like "hey, there's an error here, do you mind fixing it up?".....

 

 

It is because Brandon and Team Jordan took an extra year and a bit to write and edit aMoL because they wanted to get it right. They delayed the release for more than 6 months for this purpose, and I myself would not mind if they had taken longer if that's what was needed. I was and am all for a delay to make aMoL the best book it can be. 

 

However, when you get major errors like the Linking incident, which goes against the rules of the world that have been established - and your average member who has nothing to do with Tor, Brandon or Team Jordan can pick it up as soon as it is read, yeah, people are going to get annoyed and worried about the quality.

 

It gets people thinking, if such an obvious error wasn't picked up - what does this mean for the rest of aMoL?

I think that's an over simplification. One person's "detail" is another person's "sizeable error". We all have favourite characters. I think most poeple fall into the "hey, there's an error here, do you mind fixing it up?" category(#1) but I think there are others that fall into a "Hey, there's an error here; you should not have made that error. Are you competent enough to write the ending to this series?/Did you get enough meticulous beta-readers to go through it first?"(#2) and some people saying flat out: "You are NOT competent enough to write the ending to this series.(#3)"

 

Personally I fall into Category 1 most of the time. Sometimes Category 2. I think those in category #3 are going too far.

 

 

 

For the second part of you post; Agreed. Sums up my feelings exactly.

 

EDIT: What happened to quote tags? This indent thing if frustrating.

Edited by Olver_is_a_Forsaken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agitel, I don't feel like you're addressing what's been said. The point I was trying to make wasn't which parts of ToM (and TGS) felt better or worse to me, nor the amount to which I empathise with BS and TeamJ. I didn't even catch the ring thing on my own. It's the fact that mistakes such as this invalidate whole segments of plot; you can't have a battle at the WT without fully-channeling BA. An alternative avenue would had to have been developed and utilized to get them there, and there was simply no way to get around that. It's the same with Pevara's reaction, which is flimsy as things are, but would certainly have stood out as baseless if Linking worked the way it ought to. This is the criteria by which I suggest to judge these things, the resulting warp in plot. Naturally, though, that I think it the correct way to approach the issue doesn't mean anyone else ought to, as well; I would simply like to see if competing approaches are based in something other than personal preferences.

 

And again, you suggest the presence of numerous errors as proof-positive of their inevitability. I wholeheartedly disagree. As I said, suggestions I can make the first time I see the material are certainly within TeamJ's capability of correcting themselves. However, that is subjective, and I acknowledge that fresh eyes do count for something. Which is precisely the reason I can't stand for their decision to forego beta-reading as part of the editorial process this time around. That, I hope you guys will forgive me for saying, isn't trying their best. It's not even doing the project the courtesy it deserves. Just this man's opinion, but not any less valid for all that.

 

Actually the stuff I find most frustrating is that their's generally an in-story way of fixing some of these errors withou having to invent new things.

 

Take the rings - initially taken to prevent further meetings with Eg in TAR, fine, leave that there.  The BA have gone to TAR 'in the flesh' as such can channel at full strength and are in fact stronger than the dreamers - makes for a better fight, as the fight is won by the dreamers knowledge of TAR (which is mostly how they did it anyway).  We know that the Forsaken don't view going in the flesh as evil, as they do it, their's no reason they wouldn't teach the BA for something like this.  In Tanchico they take Amathera into  the dream and her description isn't mentioned as insubstantial - utilise how they did this...  By rewriting to include the modified by Mesanna stuff then the text then feels weaker to me.

 

I've also come up with a long explanation about how the assassins aren't necessarily a mistake, the only thing difficult to understand is the innkeeper/bouncers reaction to Mat - but throw in taveran and he's run into the exact 2 people that tell him what he needs to know - won't be the first time.  This is the weakest part of the explanation, but still possible (just about). 

 

Nothing I can do about the linking.

 

But for most of them, in my head I can get around things that initially don't make sense, when he fixes them I actually have more problems (so I'm quite glad I haven't read them)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's simply no excuse for the amount of these errors, not when people who could've remedied this are by no means in short supply, and especially not when a point was made that TeamJ are taking their time this time around exactly for the purpose of "getting AMoL just right". I don't expect to be on Harriet's call-sheet myself, being a non-entity, but surely someone who isn't could've filled that function much better. I take no issues with Luckers's absence from it as well. Theresa would've been brilliant at it, but I can see why that might not have worked either. What about Linda? Matt? Jennifer? Bob? Leigh (who, might I add, is a Tor employee)? The list goes on and on.

 

Terez and I were both offered a position on the edit team.  For various reasons that did not happen.

 

That being said, the perception of the role of the betas is fundementally flawed--though based on Brandon's comments such as 'what you have to understand is that the betas okayed this'. As one stated to me, their role was not quality control. In point of fact their role, with the possible exceptions of Matt Hatch and Jason Denzel, was fundementally superficial. A glance read.

 

As such I'm rather glad my own involvement fell through (Brandon was championing me, but Harriet shot down that period of the edit, which was to be known as the Gamma Read).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There's simply no excuse for the amount of these errors, not when people who could've remedied this are by no means in short supply, and especially not when a point was made that TeamJ are taking their time this time around exactly for the purpose of "getting AMoL just right". I don't expect to be on Harriet's call-sheet myself, being a non-entity, but surely someone who isn't could've filled that function much better. I take no issues with Luckers's absence from it as well. Theresa would've been brilliant at it, but I can see why that might not have worked either. What about Linda? Matt? Jennifer? Bob? Leigh (who, might I add, is a Tor employee)? The list goes on and on.

 

Terez and I were both offered a position on the edit team.  For various reasons that did not happen.

 

That being said, the perception of the role of the betas is fundementally flawed--though based on Brandon's comments such as 'what you have to understand is that the betas okayed this'. As one stated to me, their role was not quality control. In point of fact their role, with the possible exceptions of Matt Hatch and Jason Denzel, was fundementally superficial. A glance read.

 

As such I'm rather glad my own involvement fell through (Brandon was championing me, but Harriet shot down that period of the edit, which was to be known as the Gamma Read).

 

Peter Ahlstrom mentioned something similar as well. I still don't understand Harriet's motivations behind this "No Gamma Read!" thing. Why was Jason Denzel's role the exception (and not superficial)? Perhaps it is simply my impression of him from his reviews but he doesn't seem detail oriented à la Luckers or Herid. I just didn't feel he had read the book with a literary "fine-tooth comb". Is that what you mean? Was that his role?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In point of fact their role [...] was fundementally superficial. A glance read.

 

The beta readers had it from August 3rd to August 26th and were free to read the whole book or each chapter as many times as they wanted or could within that time period. They were asked to focus on continuity issues. Doing a word count on the beta response document, it has 27,000 words. Almost all of that is direct comments from the beta readers. In the last week they made many fewer comments than they made in the first two weeks, which to me indicates they were finding fewer issues by that time, and I would say that the issues found in week three were quite minor.

Edited by Peter Ahlstrom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So... the 'major' issues found in the first few weeks were fixed I take it, even though Brandon tweeted that everything was basically done before the beta readers even saw the book?  Nothing else like (for instance) the thing in chapter 2 with M/F linking working the opposite of how it's supposed to?  I don't even consider that in any way 'major' as far as plot goes, just very, very troublesome that such a thing was overlooked and released that way.  It could easily be corrected without impacting much of anything, but as is makes for a very obvious inconsistency that has readers noticing it rather than what the scene is actually about.

 

27,000 words is a lot of words for being mostly focused on continuity issues.  It's like 'With the Choeden Kal' x 3 in length.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simply put, when people look back on these three books ... whatever their opinion them is ... they'll have to admit that is the largest undertaking anyone has ever done to finish the work of another author.  Maybe there's a larger one out there, but I've never heard of it.  Not exactly on par with a composer being asked to finish Mozart's Requiem, but that's about the only thing I can equate it to.  Maybe Neuschwanstein would be a better comparison.

 

If you walked through Neuschwanstein and didn't know that the mind that had originally planned the entire castle had died prior to its completion, would you know?  Certainly there would be some aspects that were less adorned and not a perfect fit when compared to other parts.  Even if you had the best people to put to the task, the inspiration died with Ludwig.  Whatever was completed can be viewed as one of two things:  1.  A weak replication of his original design  2.  A testament to the greatness of his original design that inspired men to complete it.

 

I look at Sanderson's work as the latter of those two.

 

You cannot expect him to be able to capture the original characters in all their details, emotions and ideals.  Those died with RJ.  Those were a part of RJ.  They were not trinkets he left laying on a desk that someone else could pick and continue working with.  Anyone who has ever written a story of any sizable length will acknowledge that.  The characters you create are truly parts of your own persona or personal memories/feelings toward a certain person.  How can anyone pick up where that left off?  How can anyone hope to impersonate another man's inner being?  Even attempting to copy the prose of how people would have talked must be a task in and of itself.  Remember, he is not just trying to impersonate characters ... he's trying to do so in a world not of his own creation.  Have you ever been so concerned about your hair looking good that you didn't realize your zipper was down?  

Now, let's not dodge some obvious points completely.  Just like the men who finished Neuschwanstein had monetary profits to gain by doing so, so did Sanderson by finishing WoT.  It'd be foolish to overlook this completely or to suggest that he took this on without acknowledging, at least to himself, that this could very well be the biggest break of his career.  Would any of us had looked at such an offer and tossed it away?  Could we have thrown away the means to make our family's life incredibly easier?  For myself, I cannot say that I would ... but I've never felt this as an overpowering undertow evident in his writing.  Maybe some people do ... but maybe those are the same people who know that'd be the main reason they'd take the job.  "We see the world, not as it is, but as we are."

 

All in all, what makes me upset is when people read these books that he has written and cast judgments on Sanderson, the author, as a whole.  Or, even worse, attack him on a personal level.  This task that he has taken on could not have been easy and was probably the hardest piece of writing he's ever had to do.  Unless you are Brandon Sanderson, don't sit here behind your computer screen and try to assume you know why he did this.  In the same vein, don't sit here and seemingly imply that you could have done a better job.  

 

For the most part, this thread has been mostly positive criticism to the work, itself.  But I've seen enough of the aforementioned attacks on these boards and, quite frankly, it makes me sick.

 

Sorry for the rant, but it bugs me greatly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

putts, I don't know if your intention was to address anything that was said on the last page, but if so, that's truly the textbook definition of a straw-man. I saw no one suggest that Brandon was 'all about the money', nor did anyone propose himself as a suitable replacement to him.

 

What I did see, were people saying that the work is flawed, beyond what could realistically have been achieved by both BS and TeamJ, and that it's now common knowledge that some simple measures that could've worked to mitigate that situation--and were employed in the past--weren't this time around. That, after a long time of being told that mistakes made in the past have generated a genuine interest in rethinking the process to achieve the best possible outcome. Is it any wonder that emotions are running high?

 

PS Peter, if you're still reading, nothing I say is meant to invalidate the appreciation most of us feel for your hard work, yours and Brandon's, Maria's and Alan's, and of course Harriet's. You have my thanks for making it part of your life, all of you. But, at the same time, I'm dissatisfied with parts of what I know of Brandon's process, and much of the little I know of Harriet's discretion. This basic right--to shape my own judgements and voice them--I don't relinquish. I hope I never do so in a disrespectful manner, as that is never my intention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 What I did see, were PS Peter, if you're still reading, nothing I say is meant to invalidate the appreciation most of us feel for your hard work, yours and Brandon's, Maria's and Alan's, and of course Harriet's. You have my thanks for making it part of your life, all of you. But, at the same time, I'm dissatisfied with parts of what I know of Brandon's process, and much of the little I know of Harriet's discretion. This basic right--to shape my own judgements and voice them--I don't relinquish. I hope I never do so in a disrespectful manner, as that is never my intention.

 Very well said Yoniy0, that is what it comes down to mostly for myself as well. You know how long and hard I defended the "extra time" which makes it all the more dissapointing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. Yoniy0 - the PS to Peter is the first time I have read that level of civility from you or your ilk. Well said indeed. 

 

I have read the site on and off for nearly as long as it has been around, and the vehemence and personal nature of the argument against Mr. Sanderson has been a major turn off. The statement above, seconded by Sutree of all people, was refreshing. Hopefully, soon, we can get back to discussing the books as our primary purpose.

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...