Luckers... Official on Brandon

[skalors3]

@Suttree Regardless of the admiited problems with the prose, I still stand by the fact that prose is subjective. If BS had never stated that prose was a weak point, people wouldn't have a leg to stand on. His openness and honesty is used against him. He never said his prose was awful, he said he had difficulty with it.

 

As far as timelines and overall mistakes, they are what they are. I personally think people take these books and themselves to seriously for being this upset. They are such small things in a big world. It is a minority feeling among readers too, it just seems like a majority because you see the complaint everywhere on these small, online communities. I have not read a single word that has ruined this series for me.

[skalors3]

@Fisher I am positive that Verin being black was RJ. Moraine was RJ. Also, Jain likely was his idea too. No clue about Camelyn.

[Suttree]

@Suttree Regardless of the admiited problems with the prose, I still stand by the fact that prose is subjective. If BS had never stated that prose was a weak point, people wouldn't have a leg to stand on. His openness and honesty is used against him. He never said his prose was awful, he said he had difficulty with it.

 

Actually that isn't true. As mentioned earlier my college background is literature, strong/weak prose is most certainly not entirely subjective. If you do what Saken suggested and apply a "literary analysis" to any work that can and has been highlighted fairly easily. Let me preface this by saying this is not a knock at all but if someone says prose is wholly subjective they haven't studied the topic. Thanks for your response as well, I really think a polite back and forth is the only way we will all realistically move forward on this topic.

[ArveduiEreinion]

@ArveduiEreinion:

 

I agree with you on some points and disagree with others in your most recent post. When someone stops giving their reasoning for an opinion, and turn to the “just because” line, then discussion stops and argument beings. I concur with you that that is unhelpful, and while its OK to feel that way, not really helpful in a discussion with other people about the books.

 

On the whole whether you could say that BS's books are the “best written” books in the series, of course an argument could be made. It might not be an argument coming from a academic literary criticism perspective, but that doesn't make it invalid. For example, one could say that the pacing of these last two books was a significant improvement over RJ's pacing, especially his most recent books. For another, I think it could also be argued that BS's writing of “Darth Rand” was very impressive, and was much better than much of RJ's portrayal of Rand in his last books. While you saw Rand slowly sliding down into madness, with a few eerie events, I always felt like RJ liked Rand Al'Thor the person too much to take him down some of the darker aspects of the character. BS's “Darth Rand” was really the first time that I had any trepidation towards Rand's evolving character. And I have read some valid arguments about why people thought BS's WoT books were better than RJ's (meaning they have reasons behind their opinions, not just belief).

 

Now, I can't really argue very well for thinking that these books are the “best written” of WoT, because, well, I don't happen to think that myself. And that wasn't my intention in my post from the start. However, I also don't think that someone who believes the other way is objectively wrong, either. In addition, let's say that a person is arguing from a position of belief. What does it serve in the discussion to attack them personally for their argument? Does it advance the topic that is being discussed? Or, is it at that point becoming a part of the problem and derailing the thread topic even more? I should also be very clear in that this behavior is rampant on both sides of the Brandon Sanderson Debate.

 

I enjoy Academic Literary Criticism. But that is not the only way to approach judgment on a piece of literature. Not does coming from an Academic Literary Criticism approach mean that your opinion or judgment of that piece of literature is more valid. What Academic Literary Criticism DOES provide is an acknowledged framework to judge a piece of literature upon, along with the vocabulary to frame that judgment in. As such, it is a tool that can be used when judging literature, but only one of many tools that can be used. Heck, RJ himself was widely derided by many Academic Literary Critics when it came to his Wheel of Time series. Although he brought High Fantasy back into popularity for many, and was the first of a new generation of Fantasy Writer's to top NY Times best-selling list, he never won any Literary Awards for it. No Hugos, no Locuses, no Nebulas.

 

In fact, ArveduiEreinion, I probably agree with you on the whole about BS's writing in WoT. I just find it disturbing when any one person begins to think that their opinion on a deeply subjective matter is the only “right” way to think of it. It is this thinking, on both sides of the debate, coupled with a propensity to personally attack those who disagree with others, that is dragging DM down at the moment. Because I don't think that the BS written WoT books are the best written, I am curious to hear why others really do enjoy them so much. I am also curious as to what those same people think about the issues I have with BS's writings. If they have no interest in hearing my opinions, and only wish to say that BS's books are the best “because”, well, then I choose to ignore that poster and reply to someone else's post that I think has substance.

 

What I see instead on DM is that when the Brandon Sanderson Debate rears it head in a thread, is more of the following:

-People weigh in on both sides of the argument, some with rational explanations, some with irrational explanations

-Once the debates really get going, opponent's of both sides ignore the rational arguments that are made by some of their opponents, and instead focus on those that are irrational. They then proceed to attack those irrational ideas instead of responding to the rational ones.

 

I ask myself, why? If you have the choice to respond to someone who is making rational points, and instead call out someone for making irrational arguments, what is the point? You have only derailed the discussion onto an argument about “feelings” about the book rather than reasoned opinions. If one responds instead to the rational arguments, then the discussion would continue, and well, you could ignore the irrational.

 

I understand that passions run hot when it comes to feelings about the Wheel of Time, but come on, can't we be civil about this? Both sides of the Brandon Sanderson Debate are running the very real possibility of destroying the integrity of DM, and chasing away those who have come here to join in a sense of community about a wonderful fantasy series that we all love. And that one side or another of this debate started with the personal attacks first is not a valid defense. I mean, come on, that sounds like a 2^nd grader. That is no way no win a discussion. We are all conscious, (somewhat) rational, beings. Before anyone posts something to a thread, you should ask yourself the question: Am I adding something positive to this thread that furthers the topic of the thread? Because if you're not, then you are just a troll, regardless of who threw the first punch.

 

@Luckers:

I didn't say it in any previous posts, but I have had, and continue to have a great deal of respect for you Luckers.  For expressing your views, you have become a lightning rod in the WoT community, and yet have tried to remain civil and above much of the baser parts of the argument.  Could you have possibly handled the situation better at points?  Probably.  But the issues over Brandon Sanderson's writing of the WoT (quality, right of criticism, etc) where going to be there regardless of your actions.  It isn't like you expressed your views, and all of a sudden a bunch of people decided that they didn't quite like BS's handling of the WoT.  They were there, and had been there for awhile.  So had those who really love BS's WoT, along with those who feel it isn't right to criticize BS's WoT work.  This coupled with the HUGE anticipation for the FINAL LAST BOOK EVER OF THE WHEEL OF TIME, meant that a lot of this argument was inevitable.  You may have assassinated the Arch-Duke (a bit of stretch, I know), but you aren't responsible for the Great War that followed.

 

First, let's make a point about vocabulary: it matters. I use the word "argue" in the sense of presenting reasons for or against a position. Not opinions, not beliefs, or [insert noun/verb indicating subjectivity here]. I think Suttree, Mark D, and I are asking opponents to argue their reasoning. They may fail to do so, and be entitled to their opinions, but that doesn't make their opinions inherently valid or particularly intelligent.  This is especially true when people continue to use their beliefs as a shield when confronted with objective facts. You are right to point out that one should stop argument at that point but not for the reasons you illuminated in your post. I wouldn't go so far as to call that person stupid (I would politely refrain from continued discussion) and I haven't seen Suttree/Luckers/etc engage in that behavior either.

 

Tangentially, you mentioned "Academic Literary Criticism" as one of many "tools" by which to judge the WoT. Well, yes, but I fail to understand the import of this comment. I also think this is also where I depart company with Suttree. I agree that there are subjective and objective elements to any piece of art. Let me also grant that "Academic Literary Criticism" as you intended it also validly states how subjective/objective elements are defined and argued over. Your argument that using such techniques doesn't make one argument more "valid" as opposed to another technique does not follow. Again, you may argue your belief that your child's fingerpainting is "better" than a Picasso but acknowledge that your argument does stem from belief. Further, also acknowledge that your stated belief is an exercise in persuasion. That is, your statement may be more or less persuasive. Here, as an extreme example, the statement I used is (probably) highly unpersuasive. 

 

Finally, I think you are again confusing my own argument. I argued that, as a matter of prose, no one could seriously argue that TGS or ToM were the best in the series. Does anyone think a serious argument can be made? As Pres. Obama would say: "Please proceed governor." I know you don't want to make that argument but I invite true defenders to do so.

[skalors3]

@Suttree I have not studied the topic, but I cannot see a ton of objectivity to it. I may be absolutely wrong. My skills lie elsewhere, lol.

[The Fisher King]

skalor - if you're right about all that, then THANKS! Brandon and I are all square then!!! ;-)

 

 

Fish

[skalors3]

@Fisher Lol.

[Alanna]

I'm kind of late to the party, but I wanted to add my two cents, especially since this is pretty much the one and only time I'll say this. Personally, I'm just sad that the WOT Discussion boards here on DM have turned into this, on the eve of the release of the last book. I was really excited to get back into things here on these boards, to flail and discuss and theorize for the last time before AMOL comes out. But this is the first time I've even logged in here in weeks, because it's become such a toxic place. It's not fun at all. I've mostly been hanging around tor.com and other places, with other fans who are excited for AMOL like me. Because here, I just feel like I'm surrounded by people harping on about the same things over and over again.

 

I agree with Drekka that it's gotten to a point where it's no longer "constructive" criticism, it's just beating the same old stuff around. And I hate that anytime I say something like this, I get shot at by people who say I'm not "allowing" them to express their own views. Express your views, but once you've made your point, why belabor it? You get to express your views, your dissatisfaction, with Brandon's writing on the WOT books. Can I not express my dissatisfaction with these boards? 

 

I get that for some people, like Luckers, they're really disappointed by what they're getting. All I'm saying is, I'm really disappointed by what I'm getting here on DM. I remember this being a really fun place before the release of TGS and TOM, and was looking forward to more of that for AMOL. But it's just not like that anymore. And I think the numerous replies on here, which are much like my own, shows that many other members here feel the same way.

 

And sure, I could avoid threads like this. I have avoided the thisguy thread for that very reason, haven't looked into it once. But so many of the other threads are getting hijacked by people who just want to complain on and on. Anytime new material has been released, you get the same people (pretty much the same four or five people) complaining about the quality and the errors, instead of discussing the plot and expounding on new theories and ideas for that.

 

Anyhow. I don't know if this was the right place for this, but I just felt like I needed to express my dissatisfaction with these boards and with the fandom here on DM. I don't think it's been good for the release at all. At the same time, retreating from this place has sort of allowed me to just enjoy the new material in my own right, for myself, and maybe that's a good thing.

 

 

[DaoineSidhe]

@ArveduiEreinion:

 

In the way that you are using argument, there is no problem with arguing ones' points on a topic.  I was using argument more in the sense of "having a discussion" vs. "having an argument".  The tone implied by "people arguing" is typically indicative of yelling, anger, and vitriol much more compared to the tone implied by "people discussing".  It is that type of arguing that I am against, not rational argument.  That may be a somewhat incorrect impression I have of the word, but it seems to me to be how the word is used commonly today.  Outside of our usage of this word, I think we agree on this point in many ways.

 

The problem I have with stating that certain aspects of judging literature are "objective" (ie the prose IS better, as a fact) is that those "objective" rules were decided subjectively by academic elites based upon their opinions of what good writing is.  No matter how hard you try, there is no "objective truth" in literature than you can judge, compared to say, in math where 2+2=4, or in physics where you can say that gravity causes objects to fall towards the earth at approximately 9.8 meters per second squared.  Those are observable, objective truths that didn't rely on someone creating the "facts", they were already there to begin with, and we just discovered them.  Academics in Literature didn't "discover" the facts that make great literature.  No, they talked among themselves and decided that certain things in writing were good, while certain things in writing were bad.  I happen to agree with a lot of literary criticism, especially when it focuses on the "why" of certain things in a story are done the way they are.  That is why I don't think you can say outright that "A" is better than "B" at writing.  You can certainly have an opinion on which is better, but there is no definitive "truth" to that opinion.

 

I don't disagree with your judgment, only the idea that your judgment is in any way an "objective fact".  And when you start stating your judgment as "objective fact", you discourage others who might have disagreed with you from posting at all by subtly disregarding their points before they are even made.

[Suttree]

@Alanna

 

Thanks for stopping by Alanna. It's absolutely the right place for it and I think if you spend a bit of time around now you will notice that people have been heeding views like your own and as such keeping the critique to thisguy and here the majority of the time. The reality is it's been months since it has been derailing every thread on a regular basis. I honestly am perplexed when you say "so many of the other threads are getting hijacked" as that has not been the case for some time. I know for certain when people are seeing it these days(such as in the Meirin thread today) it is quickly shut down & redirected.

 

Also would like to quickly touch on this "beating a dead horse" theme that seems to keep popping up. With a full admittance and understanding that things got out of hand a few months back(on the flip side the faults were not realistically addressed after the TGS release for far too long and the subsequent drop in quality with ToM almost served as a wake up), for the first time in a long time we have new material being released. Therefore it only stands to reason the quality of that new material will be discussed(hopefully now only in the thisguy thread). I honestly can't understand how people get so bent out of shape by others offering up honest opinion on new material as it's released. Further with things like the Mat portion of the pre materials when you see the same exact problems popping up despite us being assured that they had been fixed do you really expect people not to comment on it? Not to mention the critique is hardly centered here around 4 or 5 people at DM. It happens at Theoryland, it happens at Tor, it has been a topic of discussion in every corner of the WoT fandom.

 

Looking forward however I for one was very excited to read Leigh's "spoiler free" review today. That combined with Peter's assurances about Brandon's hard work and pride in the result has me more optimistic than I have been in quite some time. They have gone all in with describing the work that went into this one and I promise you no one will be happier with an excellent AMoL than those who have been roundly disappointed with parts of TGS and ToM. It sounds like this will be Brandon's best work in the world of the wheel and RJ deserves no less in what will be the culmination of his life's effort.

[Delirium]

I'm kind of late to the party, but I wanted to add my two cents, especially since this is pretty much the one and only time I'll say this. Personally, I'm just sad that the WOT Discussion boards here on DM have turned into this, on the eve of the release of the last book. I was really excited to get back into things here on these boards, to flail and discuss and theorize for the last time before AMOL comes out. But this is the first time I've even logged in here in weeks, because it's become such a toxic place. It's not fun at all. I've mostly been hanging around tor.com and other places, with other fans who are excited for AMOL like me. Because here, I just feel like I'm surrounded by people harping on about the same things over and over again.

 

I agree with Drekka that it's gotten to a point where it's no longer "constructive" criticism, it's just beating the same old stuff around. And I hate that anytime I say something like this, I get shot at by people who say I'm not "allowing" them to express their own views. Express your views, but once you've made your point, why belabor it? You get to express your views, your dissatisfaction, with Brandon's writing on the WOT books. Can I not express my dissatisfaction with these boards? 

 

I get that for some people, like Luckers, they're really disappointed by what they're getting. All I'm saying is, I'm really disappointed by what I'm getting here on DM. I remember this being a really fun place before the release of TGS and TOM, and was looking forward to more of that for AMOL. But it's just not like that anymore. And I think the numerous replies on here, which are much like my own, shows that many other members here feel the same way.

 

And sure, I could avoid threads like this. I have avoided the thisguy thread for that very reason, haven't looked into it once. But so many of the other threads are getting hijacked by people who just want to complain on and on. Anytime new material has been released, you get the same people (pretty much the same four or five people) complaining about the quality and the errors, instead of discussing the plot and expounding on new theories and ideas for that.

 

Anyhow. I don't know if this was the right place for this, but I just felt like I needed to express my dissatisfaction with these boards and with the fandom here on DM. I don't think it's been good for the release at all. At the same time, retreating from this place has sort of allowed me to just enjoy the new material in my own right, for myself, and maybe that's a good thing.

QFT

 

Very well put Alanna

[MarkDiLillo]

I'm kind of late to the party, but I wanted to add my two cents, especially since this is pretty much the one and only time I'll say this. Personally, I'm just sad that the WOT Discussion boards here on DM have turned into this, on the eve of the release of the last book. I was really excited to get back into things here on these boards, to flail and discuss and theorize for the last time before AMOL comes out. But this is the first time I've even logged in here in weeks, because it's become such a toxic place. It's not fun at all. I've mostly been hanging around tor.com and other places, with other fans who are excited for AMOL like me. Because here, I just feel like I'm surrounded by people harping on about the same things over and over again.

 

I agree with Drekka that it's gotten to a point where it's no longer "constructive" criticism, it's just beating the same old stuff around. And I hate that anytime I say something like this, I get shot at by people who say I'm not "allowing" them to express their own views. Express your views, but once you've made your point, why belabor it? You get to express your views, your dissatisfaction, with Brandon's writing on the WOT books. Can I not express my dissatisfaction with these boards? 

 

I get that for some people, like Luckers, they're really disappointed by what they're getting. All I'm saying is, I'm really disappointed by what I'm getting here on DM. I remember this being a really fun place before the release of TGS and TOM, and was looking forward to more of that for AMOL. But it's just not like that anymore. And I think the numerous replies on here, which are much like my own, shows that many other members here feel the same way.

 

And sure, I could avoid threads like this. I have avoided the thisguy thread for that very reason, haven't looked into it once. But so many of the other threads are getting hijacked by people who just want to complain on and on. Anytime new material has been released, you get the same people (pretty much the same four or five people) complaining about the quality and the errors, instead of discussing the plot and expounding on new theories and ideas for that.

 

Anyhow. I don't know if this was the right place for this, but I just felt like I needed to express my dissatisfaction with these boards and with the fandom here on DM. I don't think it's been good for the release at all. At the same time, retreating from this place has sort of allowed me to just enjoy the new material in my own right, for myself, and maybe that's a good thing.

 

Honestly, what do some of you want us to do? Sit back and just pretend we live in candy land and act like nothing is wrong? Just theorize about something that may be a blatant error? Do you want everyone to just pretend like things are OK when they're not?

 

This is important and it's all that needs to be said:

 

Half the time we cannot even discuss theories because the new author has been so inconsistent that we honestly cannot tell if something is a clue or if it is just an oversight.

 

I would love if we could all just hold hands and pretend that everything was okay. I would love if we could all just sit back and theorize what is going to happen next. I just find it hard to theorize about dreadbanes and dreamshards when the reality is that they are simply poorly conceived plot devices used by the new author to plaster together a scene he envisioned. So ya...you're not the only one pissed off that the forums aren't the same. The rest of us are too.

[Delirium]

 

I'm kind of late to the party, but I wanted to add my two cents, especially since this is pretty much the one and only time I'll say this. Personally, I'm just sad that the WOT Discussion boards here on DM have turned into this, on the eve of the release of the last book. I was really excited to get back into things here on these boards, to flail and discuss and theorize for the last time before AMOL comes out. But this is the first time I've even logged in here in weeks, because it's become such a toxic place. It's not fun at all. I've mostly been hanging around tor.com and other places, with other fans who are excited for AMOL like me. Because here, I just feel like I'm surrounded by people harping on about the same things over and over again.

 

I agree with Drekka that it's gotten to a point where it's no longer "constructive" criticism, it's just beating the same old stuff around. And I hate that anytime I say something like this, I get shot at by people who say I'm not "allowing" them to express their own views. Express your views, but once you've made your point, why belabor it? You get to express your views, your dissatisfaction, with Brandon's writing on the WOT books. Can I not express my dissatisfaction with these boards? 

 

I get that for some people, like Luckers, they're really disappointed by what they're getting. All I'm saying is, I'm really disappointed by what I'm getting here on DM. I remember this being a really fun place before the release of TGS and TOM, and was looking forward to more of that for AMOL. But it's just not like that anymore. And I think the numerous replies on here, which are much like my own, shows that many other members here feel the same way.

 

And sure, I could avoid threads like this. I have avoided the thisguy thread for that very reason, haven't looked into it once. But so many of the other threads are getting hijacked by people who just want to complain on and on. Anytime new material has been released, you get the same people (pretty much the same four or five people) complaining about the quality and the errors, instead of discussing the plot and expounding on new theories and ideas for that.

 

Anyhow. I don't know if this was the right place for this, but I just felt like I needed to express my dissatisfaction with these boards and with the fandom here on DM. I don't think it's been good for the release at all. At the same time, retreating from this place has sort of allowed me to just enjoy the new material in my own right, for myself, and maybe that's a good thing.

 

Honestly, what do some of you want us to do? Sit back and just pretend we live in candy land and act like nothing is wrong? Just theorize about something that may be a blatant error? Do you want everyone to just pretend like things are OK when they're not?

 

This is important and it's all that needs to be said:

 

Half the time we cannot even discuss theories because the new author has been so inconsistent that we honestly cannot tell if something is a clue or if it is just an oversight.

 

I would love if we could all just hold hands and pretend that everything was okay. I would love if we could all just sit back and theorize what is going to happen next. I just find it hard to theorize about dreadbanes and dreamshards when the reality is that they are simply poorly conceived plot devices used by the new author to plaster together a scene he envisioned. So ya...you're not the only one pissed off that the forums aren't the same. The rest of us are too.

 

 

We are asking that criticism is kept to the designated threads, instead of certain people de-railing almost every thread with sniping about Sandersons' interpretation of a character, his writing style, his prose or lack-there-of, whether he wrote this bit or not, blatant attacks on his work ethics, whatever.

 

Even if they are valid criticisms, it is dragging the community spirit down to be always discussing the negative aspects.

 

As for the "poorly conceived plot devices", unless you have access to RJs notes, how do you know these are the inventions of Sanderson and not laid out in the notes?

[Barid Bel Medar]

 

 

We are asking that criticism is kept to the designated threads, instead of certain people de-railing almost every thread with sniping about Sandersons' interpretation of a character, his writing style, his prose or lack-there-of, whether he wrote this bit or not, blatant attacks on his work ethics, whatever.

 

 

 

That is exactly what is happening at the moment. I have already given info on how everyone can help to improve the situation. You can't just say "go fix it" and then crawl back into a corner. This requires effort from everyone who cares enough to post on DM. 

 

I can totally understand the dissatisfaction and people have every right to express that sentiment. However, if we want things to improve, everyone can do something - however small. It's not exactly hard either. A simple [Plot Specific] addition to a title of a thread will go a long way  to helping things. Whoever anyone thinks is to blame - there is no point waiting around for others to fix things up. I am trying very hard to do so, but it requires effort from everyone. 

 

Edit: A bit late, probably won't even see it, but I felt the need anyway. This wasn't aimed at you specifically, it just happened that the quote suited the purpose. So I am not singling anyone out here, just a general note that I hope people will take notice of. 

[Delirium]

 

 

 

We are asking that criticism is kept to the designated threads, instead of certain people de-railing almost every thread with sniping about Sandersons' interpretation of a character, his writing style, his prose or lack-there-of, whether he wrote this bit or not, blatant attacks on his work ethics, whatever.

 

 

 

That is exactly what is happening at the moment. I have already given info on how everyone can help to improve the situation. You can't just say "go fix it" and then crawl back into a corner. This requires effort from everyone who cares enough to post on DM. 

 

I know you have been doing your best to keep it contained Barid and it is very much appreciated.  

 

Hopefully the hostile feeling around the forums will dissipate and we can look forward to the new book without being on the defensive all the time. 

[Suttree]

Its exactly what has been happening for quite a while and again thanks to BFG(who is on the other side of the debate) being one of the few to see and comment on the reality on the situation. You have being doing a solid job Barid. Hats off to you and everyone else who has been involved trying to turn it around on both side of the debate. The simple fact is people are more proactive and the critique has not "been derailing every thread", that hasn't been the case for some time(talk about beating a dead horse...jeez).

[Alanna]

Thanks for the reply, Suttree. I admit I have not been around in several weeks; this is my first time back in a while. I came by mostly to see if there was any discussion on Leigh Butler's review. So if things have improved, then that's great. I stopped hanging around back around the time when the Mat chapter and the prologue were released, I believe. For what it's worth, I have never seen your critiques as out of hand or repetitve, so I wouldn't apply the 'beating a dead horse' schtick to you. Your criticisms are usually professional and sincere, whereas some other people's sometimes come off as unnecessarily snarky. And I'm usually a pro-snark kind of person :D

 

To clarify, I didn't mean it was only 4 or 5 people making critical comments; I meant that there were 4 or 5 people who seemed to be making the same comments and arguments over and over, all over the place. I would not count you among those people. I have, of course, seen negative comments elsewhere, including at Tor, though in general the vibe there is just much less...vitriolic. Again, though, this is going by what I had seen around here a few weeks ago.

 

Anyhow, I did enjoy reading the speculation here on Leigh's review, so perhaps I will tentatively pop in here and there over the next few weeks (I just finished my WOT reread, so I have nothing else to do!). I'm just in a very happy place right now with regard to WOT and AMOL coming out, and I don't want to ruin it for myself by feeling like I'm in a negative place.

[The Fisher King]

Alanna...whatever the opinions, I have always enjoyed your posts going back a looooooong time!! :)

 

 

Fish

[Alanna]

Thanks Fish! Same to you :D

[Suttree]

Anyhow, I did enjoy reading the speculation here on Leigh's review, so perhaps I will tentatively pop in here and there over the next few weeks (I just finished my WOT reread, so I have nothing else to do!). I'm just in a very happy place right now with regard to WOT and AMOL coming out, and I don't want to ruin it for myself by feeling like I'm in a negative place.

That was fun wasn't it! All the speculation from her review put me in a great frame of mind in terms of excitement for AMoL.

 

Thank you for the perspective as well and hope to see more of you as we get closer to release.

 

Edit: +1 to what Fish said above.

[Mr Ares]

 

 

The problem with this is, most of it is subjective. 

 

Prose is subjective.

 

Mat not sounding like Mat is subjective.

 

Cadsuane not sounding like Cadsuane is subjective.

 

Aviendha not saying Rand al Thor being a mistake is subjective.

 

It is impossible outside of an educational analysis of the writing itself to discuss whether or not BS did a good or bad job.

 

Ya....you're wrong.  Some of it is subjective, but most of it can be backed up with objective reasoning.

@MarkD Like what?

 

@Suttree

Just because one author does not feel his/her prose is not as polished as anothers, does not mean that I won't.

 

Just because BS feels that he didn't get Mat right, doesn't mean that I think that.

 

We can do this all day.  This is something that cannot be argued, not on a forum anyway. 

 

I started reading Bakker and Cormac MCCarthy per guidance you suggested to someone else.  While Bakker's writing was fine I thought the story was terrible and did not finish.  I could not imagine anyone finding Cormac McCarthy at all enoyable to read, horrible.

 

Here is the kicker.  I think that The Sword of Truth Series was and is awesome and Mistborn is amazing. Everything in life is subjective.

 

You cannot argue BS vs RJ. It is rediculous.

It is not true that everything in life is subjective. And even if you accept that everything in literature is, I think it needs to be borne in mind that some opinions are worth more than others. Not due to what side of the argument they are on, but due to how they are expressed. An opinion that can explain why the Sword of Truth is awesome is worth more than one which just says, "no, it's rubbish and Terry Goodkind is a horrible person". Some people have expressed views in support of Brandon's work, and in criticism of it, which attempt to explain their feelings. Some have just said that they hate or love it in an non-constructive way. You can argue BS v RJ. If it happens all the time, it gets tiresome, but it is still a debate worth having (just not one which anyone wants to see take over). See, if someone, such as myself, expresses a measure of disappointment in Brandon's efforts, and someone can put forward a persuasive case for the merits of things that I disliked, while it won't necessarily change my view (although the possibility does exist), it can at least help me to understand why others liked it, and help gain a measure of appreciation that was previously lacking. I think it's worth comparing the two authors, and debating the relative merits of each. It's just not worth two sides sitting around slagging off the others preferred author, before moving on to slagging each other off.

 

As for which author is better, I think there's only one way to find out: FIGHT!

 

On the continuity errors and such, the time was already screwed pre-tGS.

No. No it wasn't. RJ maintained a timeline with very few errors, that could be tracked by fans with remarkable accuracy. I'm not aware of any other fantasy author whose timeline was as good as RJ's, in fact. Most others are far too vague.

I am mortal, so was RJ. It would taken a hell of alot more than three books for RJ to have finished, failes rescue took three books, Elayne's succession took 3-5, depending on subjective facts, Perrin and Matt were left out of books. I'm 30, and even if RJ had perfect health I couldn't live as long as it would taken RJ to finish. If RJ had lived I think he would have lost his audience around book 15 because they wouldn't continue reading 12,000 word books forever. Diehards on DM and other fansites would've kept reading. The vast majority would've disappeared.

I'm not sure what a subjective fact is. But I see no reason to assume that RJ would have taken a hell of a lot more than three books, or even that he would have taken that many. Look at what he accomplished with Egwene in one chapter of KoD. Yes, you can probably point to a few chapters and say very little happened, but by the same token you can also point to examples of RJ pacing things quickly, not dragging them out. If he was always slow paced, you'd have a point. Given that he wasn't, and was already showing signs of picking up the pace, you don't. Just because it takes a long time to put the pieces in the correct position for the endgame, doesn't mean it takes a long time for the endgame to play out. TGS and ToM do not show signs of a frenetic pace that RJ would never have matched. If Sanderson can do it in three, why can't RJ?

 

One side-note: I joined the series around LOC. At that time, RJ said he needed 2-3 more books to finish the story. As more books came out, he often said 2-3 more books. When the dying man said he needed just 1 more to finish, I think he was just keeping up his spirits for the fight, giving himself a goal so as not to give up. I don't see how a long-time fan of the series could give any credence to RJ saying he was almost done. To me, it feels rushed at 3 more. I am nervous that it will end well with a scant 900 pages or whatever left.

I've seen the claim made before that RJ said he needed 2-3 more books to finish, and kept saying that. It's not backed up by any quote I've ever seen - for the early books, he used to estimate the number left. Most of the series, though, he didn't give specific estimates - he refused to put a hard number to the number of books left. It's all qualified - at least this many, hopefully not that many, maybe this many. KoD marked the first time he actually put a hard number on things in a long time. And he put that hard number to it a long time before he made his illness public. RJ's stated reason for one more book is that he didn't think that he could split what was left into two books and maintain quality across both. If we look at some of the timeline problems in ToM, we can see that this might have some justification. In the preceding books, it didn't matter if one person pulled ahead, because there was little crossover for the various groups. Once the groups start pulling together, it becomes rather more noticeable if one person is weeks ahead of another. Brandon was put in a difficult position there. RJ might have been worried about his health, that might have helped spur him on, but I think it is rather far fetched to suggest that he only promised one more book because he was dying, when he gave a legitimate reason already.

[Terez]

One side-note: I joined the series around LOC. At that time, RJ said he needed 2-3 more books to finish the story. As more books came out, he often said 2-3 more books. When the dying man said he needed just 1 more to finish, I think he was just keeping up his spirits for the fight, giving himself a goal so as not to give up. I don't see how a long-time fan of the series could give any credence to RJ saying he was almost done. To me, it feels rushed at 3 more. I am nervous that it will end well with a scant 900 pages or whatever left.

I've seen the claim made before that RJ said he needed 2-3 more books to finish, and kept saying that. It's not backed up by any quote I've ever seen - for the early books, he used to estimate the number left.

 

lol. I suggest perusing the 'how many more books' tag (found on this page). Just a sampling (RJ quotes are, well, in quotes):

 

1993

 

He still isn't sure how long WoT will go on for, saying probably seven books but adding that when The Eye of the World first came out he saw the series as four books.

 

"At present I am indeed hoping to complete the cycle in either seven or eight books. I am 90% confident that I can do it in seven, 95% confident that I can by eight. The thing is, as a famous manager of an American baseball team once said: 'It ain't over till it's over.'"

 

1994

 

"It will last several more books, until I reach the last scene, which has been in my head since the very beginning."

 

"I do hope there will not be ten books all told. I'm planning for eight, at present, and hope very strongly that I can wrap it all up in that length."

 

He said he writes as the ideas come and he has no clue as to how long the series will be!

 

He says there will be at least three more books, maybe four.

 

How many books?—"I don't know. Two, maybe three, maybe four. I know the last scene. But after I write the last scene that is all there is for these characters."

 

"It's been a long time since I was planning only seven books in the series. There will be several more books, and the next one will be published when I can finish it."

 

"I knew from the start that I was writing something that would be multiple books. I just never knew how many, exactly."

 

Not only did he decline to set the number of future WoT books, but he denied ever setting a number and says he never planned it to be only a trilogy. But he seemed to indicate he was planning 9-10 books total. When faced with the prospect of about twelve books, his wife threatened to divorce him and his editor began to make jokes about the Irish Mafia.

 

"Several. Some. A few. I'm not even speculating now on how many books I hope it will take, because every time I do mention a number I hope I can finish it in, it turns out to take longer. It will be at least eight, because I've signed the contracts for books seven and eight."

 

"I've stopped saying how many more books there will be."

 

"There will be several more books....There will be some more books. There will be a FEW more books. But not too many."

 

"At one time, I did hope for eight; now I don't think so. I certainly hope (Please, God!) it doesn't go to ten books, but I have stopped saying anything except that I will write until I reach the last scene of the last book, which scene has been in my head from the beginning."

 

1996

 

"There will be a few more books, some, not a lot, hopefully fewer than seven more."

 

"I do not know how many more books there will be. There will be at least ten total, probably more...but the safest way to say that is to say "there will be a few more, not too many, and please god not as many as have already been written!"

 

"There will be a few more books, but not too many."

 

"It will be at least ten books, yes. There will be some more books, not too many, and please God, not so many as I've already written. I am, in truth, writing as fast as I can. I want to maintain the pace of the story until I reach the final scene, which has been in my head since before I started writing The Eye of the World."

 

"Book 8 is not the end. There will be at least three more books and I am sorry for that."

 

1997

 

"There will be at least three more books. I'm not saying that there will be ONLY three. I'm saying that I can't finish in fewer than three."

 

1998

 

"I believe—believe!—there will be three more books. I am trying to finish up as soon as possible, but I cannot see how to do it in fewer than three books. That isn't a guarantee, mind! In the beginning, I thought that there would be three or perhaps four books total, but it might go to five, or even six, though I really didn't believe it would take that long. It wasn't a matter of the story growing or expanding, but rather that I miscalculated—brother, did I!—how long it would take to get from the beginning to the end. I've known the last scene of the last book literally from the beginning. That was the first scene that occurred to me. Had I written it out 10 years ago, and then did so again today, the wording might be different, but not what happens. It has just taken me longer to get there than I thought."

 

"When I finished A Crown of Swords, I said it would take me at least three books more to finish. Now that I have completed The Path of Daggers, it looks like it will take me at least three more books to finish. Believe me, guys, I'm trying as hard as I can to get there as fast as I can."

 

He told quite a few people that the series would be requiring a minimum of three more volumes, perhaps more...

 

"I don't have a set amount of books planned. I believe it will take at least three more books to reach the ending that I have known for more than 15 years."

 

"Remember, after A Crown of Swords I said at least three more books....the same thing I say now."

 

He said he knew there would be at least three more, and that he generally finds himself with twice as much planned for a novel as he can pull off in 700 pages, which happened with the new one. This suggested to me that 5-6 more books would not be surprising.

 

There was the usual mention of how many books. I heard three or so but then he said something else which I missed.

 

The usual "at least three more books" was mentioned several times in an increasingly loud voice.

 

"I am only asked that question by about 300 people a day. The answer is that there will be at least three more books. At least. As I said earlier, I know everything that I want to happen and I have known the last scene of the last book for fifteen years. I also know that I cannot get everything that I want to happen into less than three more books. So that's where we stand at the moment."

 

1999

 

Firstly, RJ said three more books "at least" and that he'd try to do it in three if he could, but he couldn't promise it would be only three. And he said he thought it would take "at least five years".

 

"There will be at least three more books."

 

RJ said a minimum of three would be released, but probably more; he was not sure yet.

 

2000

 

"Sigh! At least three more. I know I’ve said that before, but it’s still the case."

 

"At least three more."

 

"It still sits at three more books to finish, but I've always said from the time I began using the three books that it would be AT LEAST three books—that I'd try to finish in at least three books, but I couldn't promise. I know that I couldn't possibly finish in fewer than three. If I can finish in three, I will. But that's what I'm hoping for, what I'm trying for. NOT a promise."

 

"There is no set number. It takes as much space as it takes."

 

When asked about the total number of books, he gave the stock answer of at least three more books.

 

2001

 

"Well, I'd like to do it in three, if I can, but I'm not promising anything."

 

The next book will be out very soon after he's finished writing it. He don't know how many more books there'll be. At least three. If he can finish it in three, he will.

 

There will be no more than five, but also no less than another three books to be expected to appear in The Wheel of Time series.

 

"Not too many more books ... I hope. At least three."

 

"There will be at least three more books. The next book will be in bookstores very shortly after I finish writing it, and Michael Jordan is my kid brother whom I taught to play basketball."

 

2002

 

"After Crossroads of Twilight, there will be two more books, knock wood, God willing and the creek don’t rise. I never intended The Wheel of Time to be this long. The story is progressing the way I planned, but from the beginning I believed I could tell it in many fewer words, many fewer volumes."

 

"I think twelve."—Harriet

 

2003

 

When asked "how many more books?", which of course met great laughter, he responded that he had started the process intending to have only five or six. Now on book 10, he remarked that he would complete the series in two more books if at all possible. If not, then three.

 

"If I can finish it in two more books, I will. I promise you. [Very slight pause as he thinks about that.] IF I can do it in two I will, I promise. Again I apologize."

 

He mentioned again that there's "at least two more books" and apologized for it yet again. There was no "if" clause as there was yesterday, though.

 

Jordan showed up around 7, and gave a little speech. He said there will be at least two books, and that he will not write a word more than he has to.

 

"How many more books will there be? There will be at least two more books. I apologize for that. I cannot finish it in fewer books. I will try to finish it in two more. I have known the last scene of the last book since 1984. I know where I'm going. The problem is...[my tape is once again inaudible and this was one of the few parts of his speech I could not hear, sorry gang]. That's about it."

 

"How many more books will I have in the series? At least two. You see, at first I thought it would be a five, maybe six book series, and back then that was crazy, because you either had one book or a trilogy."

 

"At least two. I keep saying I was certain there were only two more books, and I'm certainly going to try to do it in two, but very few of the fans seem to believe I'll be able to do it in two, and I'm not certain myself."

 

"There are at least two books left, at least two."

 

"I really hope—knock wood, spit over your shoulder, and sacrifice to the gods—that I can finish up in twelve books total. We shall see."

 

"No, at least two more books, I’m afraid....I’ve had some people say they’d like five or ten, but I generally throw something at them."

 

2004

 

"I hope—please God, are you listening?—that there will be only two more books in the main sequence."

 

"I very much hope to finish in two more main sequence books. It's not an absolute promise, but I'm very much hoping for it and I think I can do it."

 

"I sincerely hope it will be possible to tie everything up in two books."

 

2005

 

Book 12 will be the end. He will finish the story in one more book even if it takes 1500 pages hardcover.

 

There is only one book left in the series but it will be a doozy. He will fight to prevent it from being "George R.R. Martined," or split for publication.

 

"I am committed it is going to be 12 books, even if it is fifteen hundred pages long and it requires you to bring a luggage cart to get it out of the store. Bring your knapsack, you may need it, because no matter what the case that is going to be it."

 

"One more—the twelfth book. That will be so even if that book has to be 2000 pages in hardcover, and require a luggage cart and shoulder strap to get it out of the store."

 

"I have said it before and will say it again. There will be one more book. Even if it has to be a 1500 page book. It will be the last book even if you have to use a luggage cart to move it."

 

"For Segovia, my intention is finish with twelve books, and that may mean that the last book will be VERY long, but I really can't say how long it will take me to write. My publisher is always trying to get me to commit to a time frame. I just do a little sand dance until he goes away. I carry a small bottle of sand with me in New York for exactly that purpose."

 

Book Twelve will end the main sequence if he has to personally go to New York and beat the publishers at Tor, even if it runs two thousand pages and they have to invent a new way to bind the books (shudder). There will be two more prequels a la New Spring, and there might—very big MIGHT—be another trilogy in the same universe.

 

As others have mentioned, RJ gave us the working title of book 12 (A Memory of Light) and threatened it could be a 2000 page monster.

 

First, "the next book will be out very shortly after I'm done writing it." Next, "the next book will be the last book, even if it's 2000 pages, and you need a luggage cart to carry it out of the bookstore."

 

First, "the next book will be out very shortly after I'm done writing it." Next, "the next book will be the last book, even if it's 2000 pages, and you need a luggage cart to carry it out of the bookstore."

 

"Can we all say it together? One more book. I don't care if it has to be 2000 pages and you have to wheel it out the door. One more book."

 

2006

 

"After Knife of Dreams, there's going to be one more main-sequence Wheel of Time novel, working title A Memory of Light. It may be a 2,000-page hardcover that you'll need a luggage cart and a back brace to get out of the store. (I think I could get Tor to issue them with a shoulder strap embossed with the Tor logo, since I've already forced them to expand the edges of paperback technology to nearly a thousand pages!) Well, it probably won't be that long, but if I'm going to make it a coherent novel it's all got to be in one volume."

[skalors3]

Terez, I think you nailed the coffin shut and then buried the corpse with that reply.

[skalors3]

 

 

I'm kind of late to the party, but I wanted to add my two cents, especially since this is pretty much the one and only time I'll say this. Personally, I'm just sad that the WOT Discussion boards here on DM have turned into this, on the eve of the release of the last book. I was really excited to get back into things here on these boards, to flail and discuss and theorize for the last time before AMOL comes out. But this is the first time I've even logged in here in weeks, because it's become such a toxic place. It's not fun at all. I've mostly been hanging around tor.com and other places, with other fans who are excited for AMOL like me. Because here, I just feel like I'm surrounded by people harping on about the same things over and over again.

 

I agree with Drekka that it's gotten to a point where it's no longer "constructive" criticism, it's just beating the same old stuff around. And I hate that anytime I say something like this, I get shot at by people who say I'm not "allowing" them to express their own views. Express your views, but once you've made your point, why belabor it? You get to express your views, your dissatisfaction, with Brandon's writing on the WOT books. Can I not express my dissatisfaction with these boards?

 

I get that for some people, like Luckers, they're really disappointed by what they're getting. All I'm saying is, I'm really disappointed by what I'm getting here on DM. I remember this being a really fun place before the release of TGS and TOM, and was looking forward to more of that for AMOL. But it's just not like that anymore. And I think the numerous replies on here, which are much like my own, shows that many other members here feel the same way.

 

And sure, I could avoid threads like this. I have avoided the thisguy thread for that very reason, haven't looked into it once. But so many of the other threads are getting hijacked by people who just want to complain on and on. Anytime new material has been released, you get the same people (pretty much the same four or five people) complaining about the quality and the errors, instead of discussing the plot and expounding on new theories and ideas for that.

 

Anyhow. I don't know if this was the right place for this, but I just felt like I needed to express my dissatisfaction with these boards and with the fandom here on DM. I don't think it's been good for the release at all. At the same time, retreating from this place has sort of allowed me to just enjoy the new material in my own right, for myself, and maybe that's a good thing.

Honestly, what do some of you want us to do? Sit back and just pretend we live in candy land and act like nothing is wrong? Just theorize about something that may be a blatant error? Do you want everyone to just pretend like things are OK when they're not?

 

This is important and it's all that needs to be said:

 

Half the time we cannot even discuss theories because the new author has been so inconsistent that we honestly cannot tell if something is a clue or if it is just an oversight.

 

I would love if we could all just hold hands and pretend that everything was okay. I would love if we could all just sit back and theorize what is going to happen next. I just find it hard to theorize about dreadbanes and dreamshards when the reality is that they are simply poorly conceived plot devices used by the new author to plaster together a scene he envisioned. So ya...you're not the only one pissed off that the forums aren't the same. The rest of us are too.

Seriously Mark, it is that bad to, maybe, 50 people. Nothing I have read is anything near to the situation described above. I am just trying to come to some understanding of your position.

[Suttree]

I am mortal, so was RJ. It would taken a hell of alot more than three books for RJ to have finished, failes rescue took three books, Elayne's succession took 3-5, depending on subjective facts, Perrin and Matt were left out of books. I'm 30, and even if RJ had perfect health I couldn't live as long as it would taken RJ to finish. If RJ had lived I think he would have lost his audience around book 15 because they wouldn't continue reading 12,000 word books forever. Diehards on DM and other fansites would've kept reading. The vast majority would've disappeared.

Totally leaving aside the fallacy in your argument, so it's your opinion that if Jordan had continued with the series it would have taken "a hell of a lot" more than three books, one of the most popular fantasy series in the world would have lost the vast majority of its fans and you at age 30 would have passed away before RJ finished the work?!

 

Honestly how would you expect anyone to take you seriously with this type of statement?

 

Again on the topic of pace why does everyone seem to use CoT as the benchmark? The pace of KoD was almost equal to that of Brandon's books and where we are in the storyline has as much to do with anything with the increase as anything. We have no idea if pace is a strength of Brandon's until we see a comparable mid-late spot in his own Stormlight Archive. Again if you had judged RJ on pace after TSR or TFoH you would have said it was a huge strength.