Ta'veren-ness bugs me

[AquilaInfernus]

Ta'veren are corrective mechanisms of the pattern, not champions. It is conceivable for a shadow-aligned ta'veren to exist in this regard. The discussion about ta'veren early in the work is more about bludgeoning the protagonists into accepting their fate rather than twisting chance all over the place for them. They will it to work for them, but complain unceasingly about its problems. In fact, Mat's luck may be the crudest form of ta'veren-ness. Recall there are three from the same village - unheard of - and Moiraine uses it as a mask for the exploits at the Eye of the World. I think perhaps you're reading too much into the surface explanations and ignoring the deeper implications.

[EmperorAllspice]

any explanation that limits their abilities as much as possible is the one I'll use XD

[Thrasymachus]

They don't have conscious control over it, they get what the Pattern wants for them, up to and including their own deaths, if that's what's required. It's not a "get-out-of-trouble-free" card, it's a guarantee you'll get into trouble, and while you likely will make it out of it, if the Pattern doesn't need for you not to at least, it won't be in the way you expect nor very likely in the way you want. Wait for the end of the next book, A Crown of Swords, and pay attention to what happens to Mat.

 

Or, think about this. Faile becoming attached to Perrin was a ta'veren effect, and it was one he, at first anyway, very much did not want. If only he'd pushed her into the river when he was thinking about it, eh? But Perrin needs her to become the kind of leader the Pattern needs to have in place coming up to the Last Battle. All that ta'veren does is explain why the story is specifically about these 3 people. For Rand, it's obviously because he's the Dragon Reborn, but for Mat and Perrin, it's because they, like Rand, are fated to change the world. Being Ta'veren just means having an important destiny, but it doesn't tell you what kind of destiny it is.

[Jason Williams]

For me, the irritating thing about Ta'veren isn't the stretched coincidences or deus ex machina, it's the way it takes away from the character's achievements.

 

Random example as it's where I'm up to in my reread: The Shadow Rising, Perrin rallies the Two Rivers; does he succeed because he's brave, clever or charismatic? No, it's because he has a magic Ta'veren label.

[Wool-headed lummox]

The biggest problem with Robert Jordan's writing is that he loves to undermine and devalue his own characters, events, and concepts. You can't just sit back and read about Rand Al'Thor as a protagonist with humble beginnings and a messianic future - you're hit over the head with the fact that he's important to "the Wheel". Knowing that the main character will survive a lot of challenges which would have left a real person killed is part of the genre, you're not supposed to think about this, anymore than you should think that people can't open teleportation gateways in the real world. Having characters explicitly point this out in the text of the novels is the stupidest thing I can think of. It kills tension. It makes the world artificial and hand-held by the author.

 

Sadly, Robert Jordan just isn't a terribly good writer, and often reminds me of an oblivious graphomaniac with a superiority complex. As such, his story devices consistently achieve the exact opposite of what they were supposed to achieve, because RJ misunderstands the psychology of the reader.

[EmperorAllspice]

The biggest problem with Robert Jordan's writing is that he loves to undermine and devalue his own characters, events, and concepts. You can't just sit back and read about Rand Al'Thor as a protagonist with humble beginnings and a messianic future - you're hit over the head with the fact that he's important to "the Wheel". Knowing that the main character will survive a lot of challenges which would have left a real person killed is part of the genre, you're not supposed to think about this, anymore than you should think that people can't open teleportation gateways in the real world. Having characters explicitly point this out in the text of the novels is the stupidest thing I can think of. It kills tension. It makes the world artificial and hand-held by the author.

 

Sadly, Robert Jordan just isn't a terribly good writer, and often reminds me of an oblivious graphomaniac with a superiority complex. As such, his story devices consistently achieve the exact opposite of what they were supposed to achieve, because RJ misunderstands the psychology of the reader.

 

THANK YOU!

 

This is the point I've been trying to make. Ta'veren-ness completely destroys any kind of tension.

 

For my own sanity, I just assume that Ta'veren-ness only slightly helps them out when it looks like the avenue the pattern wants isn't being fulfilled. other times they're acting under their own skills.

[EmperorAllspice]

I guess at least Artur Hawkwing died. He was Ta'veren. I doubt him dying was good for the pattern.

 

So Ta'veren CAN be killed before their alloted time by the shadow

[ShenAnCalhar]

If anything I feel the opposite about the claim that the in-world explanation destroys the tension. In other novels in the same genre, you think the heroes being insanely lucky and no one mentioning it is better? You knew something was going to step in before Shelob devoured Frodo. If turning a blind eye to the fact that heroes in this genre are going to succeed "fixes" that aspect of tension for you, then hold onto that ability. At least in WoT, the villains understand the phenomenon to a certain extent and can use that understanding to fight it.

 

Also this thread has a weird vibe, I have never understood the "please convince me that WoT doesn't suck" thing.

[Barid Bel Medar]

It is hard to answer all these questions that you are asking. Really, my best advice would just be don't ask, just read. You are not yet half-way through the books. Many things are explained later. One thing in the Wheel of Time is that everything that you learn about from someone's PoV is not necessarily true. Just because someone thinks something, it does not make it correct.

 

So really, to save yourself and others the misunderstandings, finish the books first before asking questions. Things are not always clear, and until you have read most of the books, it is hard to explain it to you without spoilers. Most of the answers are just "read and find out". You will get your answers. Those that are not answered when you are done, ask away, there are still plenty of questions to be answered.

 

I am not trying to tell you to stop. Feel free to continue asking, and people will always be willing to answer. I just suggest what I have said is the best thing.

 

Also, you are over-thinking a lot of things. Just go along with the ride. Things will be answered. Things that are glaringly awkward or strange are often meant to be that way. I am not sure if you can do it, but for your sanity as you say, enjoy the ride, there will be plenty of time to worry about things when you have read all of the released material, plenty of time to go back and re-read to look for explanations.

 

As a rule, Fantasy is a genre that's best not to think too hard on. It is fantasy, stuff happens that isn't realistic.

[EmperorAllspice]

If anything I feel the opposite about the claim that the in-world explanation destroys the tension. In other novels in the same genre, you think the heroes being insanely lucky and no one mentioning it is better? You knew something was going to step in before Shelob devoured Frodo. If turning a blind eye to the fact that heroes in this genre are going to succeed "fixes" that aspect of tension for you, then hold onto that ability. At least in WoT, the villains understand the phenomenon to a certain extent and can use that understanding to fight it.

 

Also this thread has a weird vibe, I have never understood the "please convince me that WoT doesn't suck" thing.

 

Well, at the moment I care about this series, but I'm not having fun while reading it. So I'm trying to find a way to reconcile the things I hate and tolerate them.

 

I don't conciously turn a blind eye to it in other stories. I don't CARE about it in other stories because the author doesn't ram it in my face. I don't like being reminded that the heroes are insanely lucky. People display remarkable luck in reality and have extraordinary success stories and we don't assume that reality is shifting to help them (at least I hope people don't)

 

When you introduce the luck as a system then I want to know it's rules. It's limitations, it's failings. All things which haven't been given to me in the series so far.

 

How many times have I said this? I've been saying the same thing over and over and you people keep responding over and over. Always you respond by bringing up other fantasy series. I don't notice the luck in other fantasy series. I never have. Ever.

[EmperorAllspice]

Sigh, maybe it's cuz I keep hoping that everything is like Death Note. In that series, everything had rigid, set in stone rules. You CAN do this, you CAN'T do that. Here are the rules, BAM, here ya go.

 

I find it frustrating to read a series where luck helps the maing characters sometimes and doesn't at other times. With no real reason for why their power fails them given.

[Suttree]

with no real reason for why their power fails them given.

 

Well first off its not "their" power. They don't control it. Second for every good thing that happens there is a bad. Balance is a major theme in the wheel.

[EmperorAllspice]

But this isn't consistant or controllable by the villains. That's my problem. Can someone please tell me (I don't care about certain spoilers) HOW you fight a Ta'veren with any degree of consistancy outside of sitting and waiting for them to have a patch of bad luck

 

and it is their power. Bestowed upon them by the Pattern. Rogue can't control her mutation but it's still her power

[EmperorAllspice]

Moiraine keeps telling us that Rand isn't unkillable. and Artur Hawkwing died before his time (I'm going to assume he did for my own sanity). So there must be SOME way of killing a Ta'veren.

 

An arrow will still kill him, but that arrow will never ever hit him (at least not fatally). So functionally, he can't be killed by an arrow

[Mr Ares]

Okay. I'm 2/3 of the way through Lord Of Chaos. I'm at the part where Rand finds out about Salidar. I just had to stop when I reached that scene. I need answers.

 

What's the deal with Ta'veren-ness?

 

Bar none the concept of Ta'veren has to be the most infuriating aspect of this series for me (yes, worse than the women). It's almost driven me to abandon the series several times. The reason why is very simple:

 

I have no idea how it works!

 

What are it's limitations? It's failings? How do you counter it?

 

As it stands, it's robbing the series of the one thing any story desperately needs, especially a fantasy story that heavily features battles and warfare: Tension. There needs to be a feeling that the main characters can fail. There has to be a feeling that the forces of evil are powerful/cunning enough to win. It's what keeps the reader engaged. The issue with Ta'veren is that it makes the series run on complete arbitrariness. 4 questions:

 

1.) Does being Ta'veren control people's minds? Why could Perrin convince the Two Rivers to fight back and not Verin? What about him being Ta'veren alters what he's saying? Or does it mess with the minds of the people he's talking to? In either case, then why doesn't it work on the villains? How come Rand couldn't intimidate Ba'alzamon enough to flee from him back in book 1 or 2 if he's so insanely strong in his Ta'veren-ness?

Ta'veren is not mind control. It alters probability. It gives a nudge here and there, to make some things more likely. Verin could convince the TR people, but she would have a much harder job of it - it's really not her style to go around giving big inspirational speeches and bringing people over to her side. So she wouldn't try it begin with, and wouldn't be the best suited person for it. And there would be no mechanism to make things easier for her. The things Perrin said, they could be said by anyone. Anyone could say the right words.

 

2.) It's stated that Rand messes with probability just by existing within an area. People fall from insane heights and live wheras other people abruptly trip over their own feet and die. Why doesn't this ever happen to the chosen? To someone like Lanfear? Lanfear could just arrive, trip over her own dress and die.

Ta'veren is a corrective measure, and many people, including the Chosen, are required by the Pattern to be involved in certain events (as indicated by prophecy). Lanfear tripping over her dress and dying would drive the Pattern further off course. Some people are more significant than others, and therefore some people have more freedom in how they can act, and in how the Pattern can act upon them than others. If a person is needed in a certain place at a certain time to do a certain thing, then the Pattern will endeavour to get them there, then, and do that. Other changes made by ta'veren merely shake things up.

 

3.) Why do these uncontrolable luck fluctuations ala the kind of stuff I mentioned above even happen anyway? Isn't Ta'veren a system spawned from the Pattern itself to counter the Shadow's grip on the pattern? Why is it so horribly inefficient?

Because the Pattern is stupid - it's not sentient, RJ described it as more of a fuzzy logic device. The Pattern drifts off course - not necessarily due to the Shadow - and ta'veren are one of the mechanisms by which the Wheel attempts to drag things back.

 

4.) Rand just happened to be in the right place at the right time to overhear details about Salidar. Why doesn't this happen with things like Demandred's or Sammael's armies?

 

Now, there's an obvious reason why none of this happens. It'd be anti-climactic. But it leads to the entire series being incredibly arbitrary. To me it reeks of RJ blatantly justifying anytime he needs to include a dramatically convenient contrivance. Why did this happen? Why, he's T'averen, of course! The pattern shifts around him.

 

Now, if something lucky happens to a character, then I can just file it away under luck. Lucky things happen. and a a story is meant to be something that doesn't ordinarily happen. So odd happenings and insanely lucky things occurences are to be expected. But RJ is trying to justify it by inventing this Ta'veren system. But he doesn't explain it thoroughly. (at least not where I am. and that's well over a third of the way through the series.) It's already driving me nuts! The effects of Rand's Ta'veren-ness aren't controlled by any kind of consistant criteria. It's applied when the author needs to apply it to advance the plot. That comes off as frustrating to me.

 

How do you fight someone who's Ta'veren? Where's the tension?

Ta'veren isn't a guarantee of success, of survival, or of victory. Things can happen that the ta'veren doesn't want. They are still vulnerable to arrows and such. Probability can only go so far to protect you. How often have we seen ta'veren protect a character through insane good fortune? They mostly win through skill, strength, determination, having allies, and so on. Convenient contrivance is no more needed by WoT than it is in any other series, and probably less than many. If you feel there is a certain lack of tension, that there is no chance of the characters failing, then consider that ta'veren is not the root of this. If you feel there is a lack of tension, then that is a problem in the writing of the story, not in the concept of ta'veren. And ta'veren is better explained than a lot of magic systems.

 

Mat claims later on that he gets a string of bad luck because his good luck is being stored up for something big.

Mat is a special case - he has luck that is not a result of him being ta'veren.

 

But I can distance myself with almost every other series imaginable. Most series don't try to justify the protagonist's luck by drawing attention to it constantly. If you want to draw attention to it, that's fine. But if you make a system out of it, then I want a complete series of rules, restrictions, and laws laid out in front of me.

 

I compare to The One Power. Channeling in this series has a hard system of rules and restrictions that I can draw upon.

Well, this comes down to what you want in a magic system. Sometimes you just have to accept that some things are unknown. The precise mechanics cannot be explained by anyone in the story, because they don't know enough. Why can't the rules be left to our imagination? Give us enough and we can fill in the blanks. To hold the readers hand and explain everything, to lay down all the rules, does the reader a disservice. It's part of why I don't consider Sanderson's magic systems a big selling point - yes, he does create interesting magic systems, but then he over explains their mechanics, when he could take an interest in far more interesting aspects. Compare with Bakker's magic in the Second Apocalypse, and we see an understandable magic system, which helps the author with the philosophical points he wishes to make as well as just being a tool to move the story forward.

 

For me, the irritating thing about Ta'veren isn't the stretched coincidences or deus ex machina, it's the way it takes away from the character's achievements.

 

Random example as it's where I'm up to in my reread: The Shadow Rising, Perrin rallies the Two Rivers; does he succeed because he's brave, clever or charismatic? No, it's because he has a magic Ta'veren label.

Not so. If he didn't have the right qualities, he would still fail. Ta'veren merely alters probability. Anything that the characters do could be done if they were not ta'veren. Every word he said, everything he did, could be said or done if he were not ta'veren, and received the same response.

[Suttree]

]Not so. If he didn't have the right qualities, he would still fail. Ta'veren merely alters probability. Anything that the characters do could be done if they were not ta'veren. Every word he said, everything he did, could be said or done if he were not ta'veren, and received the same response.

 

Not only could it be said or done, it has to be possible to be said or done in the first place. Did you even read the Q&A on the topic I gave you EmperorAllspice? If so you wouldn't be saying it would be impossible for an arrow to kill a ta'veren. Further a number of the things you keep bringing up are clarified there.

 

Robert Jordan

 

C'mon guys....Mat had half a building fall on him! Give the man a little rest! If he's alive, which I will neither confirm or deny (I could probably do very well in Washington!)....but you don't have half a building fall on you without a few ill effects!

Talisein

 

Hey, he IS ta'veren. The blocks could have formed a neat little cave around him.

Robert Jordan

 

That would be pushing the laws of coincidence, if you wish to call them that, a bit far. What a ta'veren does, remember, in effect, is unwittingly bend the laws of chance to favor himself, and to affect other lives. What would happen one time in a million without him there will happen because he IS there. But there really are limits.

 

Also once again it is not "their" power. The pattern uses them, they do not use the pattern. They may get a better understanding of how it works but they can not force it to their will.

[Agitel]

Sigh, maybe it's cuz I keep hoping that everything is like Death Note. In that series, everything had rigid, set in stone rules. You CAN do this, you CAN'T do that. Here are the rules, BAM, here ya go.

 

I find it frustrating to read a series where luck helps the maing characters sometimes and doesn't at other times. With no real reason for why their power fails them given.

 

It's a game of chance with weighted dice.

 

BOOM.

 

There's your explanation. That pretty much summarizes the rules about why it works sometimes and not others. It's a very concrete and very accurate example. It's not a matter of "powers". That analogy itself sets down some pretty hard rules. It's no guarantee. Sometimes, even with weighted dice, you can still get an unfavorable roll. The Dark One himself can weight dice too a bit. Add in my gravity example and warping the pattern and you have a pretty good explanation.

 

But this isn't consistant or controllable by the villains. That's my problem. Can someone please tell me (I don't care about certain spoilers) HOW you fight a Ta'veren with any degree of consistancy outside of sitting and waiting for them to have a patch of bad luck

 

and it is their power. Bestowed upon them by the Pattern. Rogue can't control her mutation but it's still her power

 

If you really must know, and this is somewhat MAJOR spoilers. And you really should Read And Find Out without clicking this.

 

 

Sometimes in a board game it's easier to force a piece to move where you want it instead of capturing or destroying it. Rather than try to destroy ta'veren, use the effect to your advantage by limiting your opponent's moves and direct them to your goal. Think of it as "checkmate", in a way, though Jordan uses a different, fictional boardgame as an analogy in the prologue of book 8.

 

[David Selig]

For me, the irritating thing about Ta'veren isn't the stretched coincidences or deus ex machina, it's the way it takes away from the character's achievements.

 

Random example as it's where I'm up to in my reread: The Shadow Rising, Perrin rallies the Two Rivers; does he succeed because he's brave, clever or charismatic? No, it's because he has a magic Ta'veren label.

Not so. If he didn't have the right qualities, he would still fail. Ta'veren merely alters probability. Anything that the characters do could be done if they were not ta'veren. Every word he said, everything he did, could be said or done if he were not ta'veren, and received the same response.

Yet Verin said the opposite to Perrin:

 

“I have not had the opportunity to see it work before this. Or perhaps I have and did not know it.”

“What are you talking about? See what work?”

“Perrin, when we arrived these people were ready to hold on here at all costs. You gave them good sense and strong emotion, but do you think the same from me would have shifted them, or from Tam, or Abell? Of any of us, you should know how stubborn Two Rivers people can be. You have altered the course events would have followed in the Two Rivers without you. With a few words spoken in . . . irritation? Ta’veren truly do pull other people’s lives into their own pattern. Fascinating. I do hope I have an opportunity to observe Rand again.”

[garryturk]

Unlurking because this topic has brought up a question I've wondered about several times. Has there ever been evidence of a DF ta'veren, either one who turned or (more interestingly perhaps) was already sworn to the shadow when they got tapped on the shoulder and became ta'veren?

[Benganza]

But this isn't consistant or controllable by the villains. That's my problem. Can someone please tell me (I don't care about certain spoilers) HOW you fight a Ta'veren with any degree of consistancy outside of sitting and waiting for them to have a patch of bad luck

 

and it is their power. Bestowed upon them by the Pattern. Rogue can't control her mutation but it's still her power

People can resist the pull of the Ta'vereness, as you will find out when you read on.

Also Ta'veren are there to ensure the further existence of the pattern and not to let the good guys win. If the wheel thinks the best way to achieve that is by letting the forsaken win, then they will become Ta'veren.

[Suttree]

For me, the irritating thing about Ta'veren isn't the stretched coincidences or deus ex machina, it's the way it takes away from the character's achievements.

 

Random example as it's where I'm up to in my reread: The Shadow Rising, Perrin rallies the Two Rivers; does he succeed because he's brave, clever or charismatic? No, it's because he has a magic Ta'veren label.

Not so. If he didn't have the right qualities, he would still fail. Ta'veren merely alters probability. Anything that the characters do could be done if they were not ta'veren. Every word he said, everything he did, could be said or done if he were not ta'veren, and received the same response.

Yet Verin said the opposite to Perrin:

 

“I have not had the opportunity to see it work before this. Or perhaps I have and did not know it.”

“What are you talking about? See what work?”

“Perrin, when we arrived these people were ready to hold on here at all costs. You gave them good sense and strong emotion, but do you think the same from me would have shifted them, or from Tam, or Abell? Of any of us, you should know how stubborn Two Rivers people can be. You have altered the course events would have followed in the Two Rivers without you. With a few words spoken in . . . irritation? Ta’veren truly do pull other people’s lives into their own pattern. Fascinating. I do hope I have an opportunity to observe Rand again.”

 

The point being David is that it has to be possible in the first place. We know that without question. So yes someone else very well could have received the same reaction, the odds just wouldn't have been as good.

 

Unlurking because this topic has brought up a question I've wondered about several times. Has there ever been evidence of a DF ta'veren, either one who turned or (more interestingly perhaps) was already sworn to the shadow when they got tapped on the shoulder and became ta'veren?

 

Interview: Oct 5th, 2005

Robert Jordan's Blog: YET ANOTHER, IT SEEMS

Robert Jordan

 

 

For kcf, again, we have never met anyone who has the Talent of emulating the effects of a ta'veren over a small area.

I give my input on the design of the chapter icons whenever a new one seems needed, but Harriet actually decides where to place them, and I am happy to leave the job to her.

Yes, Ingtar was seen at the Darkfriend Social.

The Wheel creates ta'veren at need, making someone who is already alive one. You aren't born ta'veren. Can you imagine being around a ta'veren who is teething?

It would be possible for a Darkfriend or Forsaken to be made ta'veren, but it seems unlikely. Ta'veren are part of the Wheel's self-correcting mechanism. When the Pattern seems to be drifting too quickly, and especially if it is in the wrong direction, one or more ta'veren are created. I can't really see how making a Darkfriend or Forsaken ta'veren would help with correcting the drift of the Pattern.

[Barid Bel Medar]

For me, the irritating thing about Ta'veren isn't the stretched coincidences or deus ex machina, it's the way it takes away from the character's achievements.

 

Random example as it's where I'm up to in my reread: The Shadow Rising, Perrin rallies the Two Rivers; does he succeed because he's brave, clever or charismatic? No, it's because he has a magic Ta'veren label.

Not so. If he didn't have the right qualities, he would still fail. Ta'veren merely alters probability. Anything that the characters do could be done if they were not ta'veren. Every word he said, everything he did, could be said or done if he were not ta'veren, and received the same response.

Yet Verin said the opposite to Perrin:

 

“I have not had the opportunity to see it work before this. Or perhaps I have and did not know it.”

“What are you talking about? See what work?”

“Perrin, when we arrived these people were ready to hold on here at all costs. You gave them good sense and strong emotion, but do you think the same from me would have shifted them, or from Tam, or Abell? Of any of us, you should know how stubborn Two Rivers people can be. You have altered the course events would have followed in the Two Rivers without you. With a few words spoken in . . . irritation? Ta’veren truly do pull other people’s lives into their own pattern. Fascinating. I do hope I have an opportunity to observe Rand again.”

 

Everything that happens, everything that someone says or does under ta'veren influence is something that they could have said. It doesn't make the impossible happen, it just makes things that are less likely to happen more likely to happen.

 

For example, it could make Rand trip over a rock and avoid getting balefired. It can't bend the actual balefire to make it avoid Rand out of thin air.

 

Also Ta'veren isn't always good for the characters. It doesn't do what they want it to. Sometimes it puts them into great danger or threatens the lives of those around them if need be. If the Pattern required Rand to die, he would die.

 

Having said that, I will say again that Ta'veren is a very localised thing. The Pattern doesn't pull the strings of every single person in the world. Most of the other characters have a fair bit of free will. There is a lot of potential for disaster.

 

I mean, take the drilling of the bore for example. If the Pattern were that great, it would have never allowed Lanfear to drill the bore to the DO. It can only react to disaster, which is via Ta'veren. And as we see with Hawkwing, Ta'veren can be thwarted by the Shadow.

 

Re: Shadow Ta'veren. As touched upon by Benganza, if that is what the Pattern required, yes, the Shadow would get their ta'veren. There haven't been any recorded cases, but yes, it is possible.

 

The Pattern isn't all nice either. If the survival of the Pattern required destroying half of the world, that's what would happen. If it required Demandred to conquer the world and kill Egwene, Gawyn, Galad, Loial, Bashere, Taim and Logain, that's what would happen.

[Jason Williams]

Sadly, Robert Jordan just isn't a terribly good writer, and often reminds me of an oblivious graphomaniac with a superiority complex. As such, his story devices consistently achieve the exact opposite of what they were supposed to achieve, because RJ misunderstands the psychology of the reader.

 

It's almost a shame books never get "reimagined" like films. A complete rewrite based in the same universe but by a better writer (Sanderson?) would be interesting. Maybe.

[Suttree]

Sadly, Robert Jordan just isn't a terribly good writer, and often reminds me of an oblivious graphomaniac with a superiority complex. As such, his story devices consistently achieve the exact opposite of what they were supposed to achieve, because RJ misunderstands the psychology of the reader.

 

It's almost a shame books never get "reimagined" like films. A complete rewrite based in the same universe but by a better writer (Sanderson?) would be interesting. Maybe.

 

Please tell me that was sarcasm? The issues with TGS and ToM have been well documented elsewhere so I won't go in to detail but we have two books with very little re-readability due to Brandon. Unpolished prose, poor characterization, and lowest common denominator plot work pop up all to often. ToM quite literally reads like a rough draft in places. Brandon has done somethings well, but to suggest he is the better author is flat out laughable.

[Wool-headed lummox]

It's almost a shame books never get "reimagined" like films. A complete rewrite based in the same universe but by a better writer (Sanderson?) would be interesting. Maybe.

I firmly believe that RJ should have restricted himself to world building and prose, and left writing actual novels to another author. Of course, the writer's ego could never have permitted that. Some of the comments RJ said in interviews just made me raise my eyebrow at the monitor.

 

 

Please tell me that was sarcasm? The issues with TGS and ToM have been well documented elsewhere so I won't go in to detail but we have two books with very little re-readability due to Brandon. Unpolished prose, poor characterization, and lowest common denominator plot work pop up all to often. ToM quite literally reads like a rough draft in places. Brandon has done somethings well, but to suggest he is the better author is flat out laughable.

Brandon Sanderson feels like a better author because he does away all the weirdness and boredom of a typical Jordanian novel, and paces the story well. It's literally a gulp of fresh air after crossing a desert. He isn't actually an outstanding novelist, although I haven't read anything of his aside from TGS and ToM. I doubt an outstanding writer would have agreed to finish someone else's fantasy series, and have his name written in smaller letters than that of the original author.