Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY

Rand's Arc (Full Spoilers)


Recommended Posts

@treesong,

"he is not the only tragic figure in this tale.egwene,annoying as she could be,is more

tragic one to me."

hear hear!

anyone who is dumb enough to fall in love with an idiot like gawyn,never mind marry

him,is truly a tragic figure.

instead of creating an anti balefire weave,egwene first priority should have been creating

a megabrainplex weave to increase gawyn's brain cells.

ok,enough about egwene and gawyn,this is rand's thread after all,so on a little more serious

note,in my opinion,rand was never a tragic figure.

true,rand was mercilessly hammered physically and emotionally without respite throughout

the whole serie and the process almost destroyed him(and he almost destroyed the world in return)

but in spite of everything he always stood tall,and after his dragonmount epiphany he acknowledged

his mistakes and most importantly found balance between power,pride,need,hopes,compassion and love.

judging from the events of the last two books,rand became a more complete leader with better grasp

of the big picture,even moiraine, smart as she is,failed to understand his desire to leave a better world

afterwars:"the dragon does not bring peace,but destruction.you cannot change that with a piece of paper."

"we shall see",rand said.(ironically,the only one rand shared his innermost secrets and desires with,was lanfear).

Edited by jack of shadows
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 951
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

BenevolentCow, your post actually highlights for me one of the primary sources of that feeling of hopelessness that I've been having trouble getting my finger on. Your post helped me realize that it's not just the cyclic repetition that bothers me, but also that sense of "balance" like there can only be so much good in the world. What's the point of doing good deeds if that just means the pattern will eventually "balance" it out by making something crappy happen to someone else down the line.

 

 

 

 

How exactly is this different from the world we exist in? Just because there are nations around the world where children die of hunger every few minutes doesn't stop you and me doing the few good deeds we are capable of.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

BenevolentCow, your post actually highlights for me one of the primary sources of that feeling of hopelessness that I've been having trouble getting my finger on. Your post helped me realize that it's not just the cyclic repetition that bothers me, but also that sense of "balance" like there can only be so much good in the world. What's the point of doing good deeds if that just means the pattern will eventually "balance" it out by making something crappy happen to someone else down the line.

 

 

 

 

How exactly is this different from the world we exist in? Just because there are nations around the world where children die of hunger every few minutes doesn't stop you and me doing the few good deeds we are capable of.

It is different because the events are independent. In a balance-universe, any good you do directly causes bad to happen somewhere else to keep the scales level. In the real world, any good you do is a net gain of good (barring unforeseen consequences of course).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, but you wouldn't know that if you lived in said balance-universe. So you would try to do good as much as you could, assuming you wanted to do good, because you wouldn't know that it would cause something bad to happen down the line.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with the assumption that you wouldn't know that the universe was balanced. Assuming that the good/bad ratio is relatively specially localized, if you did what the universe defined as good to a significant degree, it would be fairly easy to see that the amount of what the universe defined as bad also rose by that same margin. Of course if it isn't localized, there could be planets out there living in utopia balanced by other planets 10 galaxies away living in hell, in which case it would be impossible for any civilization to know about the balance (assuming that the speed of light is still the limit in this universe for everything but cosmic balance), but in that case it would also be functionally irrelevant.

 

Balance in fiction is generally only invoked when there is great evil around that you want to kill off. When everyone is happy no one runs around screaming that 100 years of light will create 100 years of darkness, even though the great sages that know about the balance are still hanging around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wanted to share a post from over at TL. One of the better Rand/Moridin breakdowns I've seen.

 

Dom

Moridin in the end proved to be just as much an antithesis of his Master as Rand was. While Rand toyed with killing the DO and creating a world without Him, Moridin sought The End of Everything. In between those two human extremes and delusions stood the choice between the DO and Creator: the "Illusion" of Shai'tan, his world without any free will and the continuation of the Creator's design.

 

Moridin embodied Oblivion/nihilism and rejection of Life which he saw as "a prison for the souls". He embraced Shai'tan's cause on a false promise that Shai'tan would bring an end to everything, a promise Rand discovered Shai'tan never had any intent to fulfill.

 

The whole thematic idea behind the "merging" of Rand and Moridin did not play out in the ending, it played out during Rand's epiphany. This marked the moment of Rand's rejection of Moridin's beliefs, triumphing over the pains of his life (lives) to find again the desire to see the Pattern go on. Rand rejected Moridin's nihilism and his "darkness". Their final encounter before the confrontation turned the tables on the one in TGS and showed Rand as the dominant side. The temptation of oblivion became since the Epiphany remote, distant, not very significant.

 

Rand's challenge in the ending was rather to reject this utopia of a Creation without Shai'tan, which was simply a mirror of Shai'tan's plans, as devoid of free will, and ironically either was precisely a Pattern functioning as a Prison and fitting the worldview of Elan Morin.

 

A good question (and one we won't ever have the final answer for as RJ left no notes on this) is if Moridin, after Rand returned to reality and sealed back Shai'tan, gained some knowledge from Rand that the worldview of a Creation devoid of free will, meaningless, with humans puppets for a Deity his philosophy first exposed then the Bore allowed to transform into a crusade was actually Shai'tan...

 

I think Elan Morin probably did understand in the end. I prefer to see it that way, notably because Elan choosing the dying body to get the only oblivion he can, physical death and the wiping of Elan Morin's memories, while Rand chose to inhabit the body that could live works much better for me than having Rand alone switching body and "pushing" Moridin's soul in the other.

 

The great irony and paradox of WOT was that Shai'tan was opposed by a man who had lead and deeply believed in a society that aimed for perfection and had convinced itself it had eradicated evil while He was served by a man who was in truth, philosophically and intellectually, his greatest adversary but having been lied to didn't realize it. Elan Morin's big mistake was to have extrapolated from his Age's "comfortable stasis" a Pattern that functioned as a prison than proceeded to embrace the Deity that would bring about just such a world.

 

After defeating the temptation of Elan Morin's nihilism at Dragonmount, Rand had to defeat at SG the temptation brought by his integration with LTT: this AOL longing for an utopian "perfect world". In the end, the "Rand side" triumphed. It triumphed over Shai'tan, it triumphed over both Elan Morin and Lews Therin.

 

The only "integration" of Moridin Rand experienced was what the Aiel called "embracing Death". He no longer feared death, but unlike Moridin he didn't wish it either. It's not about Good vs. Evil, it was about Free Will vs. being puppets. Moridin wasn't the embodiment of Evil and Rand doesn't need to be "merged" with him to integrate the possibility of evil which is present in everything and everyone; Moridin just didn't realize the Creator's vision was what granted him the possibility of the choices he had made, and that his illusion of oblivion would actually annihilate free will, first depriving humanity of it completely to ultimately destroy his own free will, just as certainly as Rand/LTT's illusion of "a perfect world without Evil" did.

 

In the end, Rand left them both behind. He was "just Rand" again. It doesn't matter if it meant or not he had lost LTT's memories (I personally believe he lost them, ie: they're now just memories of memories and they'll fade like Birgitte's, by switching body, whatever barrier the Taint had destroyed or whatever pathways to his past life's memories it had bridged was on Rand's physical brain, and Moridin didn't have that on his) or if it just meant he was leaving the Dragon behind, as thematically he left both LTT's ideals behind (he had planted the seed for a "new AOL" with the Peace of the Dragon then by riding away and letting the "Dragon" die he left the world to its own devices and choices), and Moridin's beliefs behind. He had opened a world of possibilities for himself again. He's gone from being as poweful ta'veren the most constrained soul in the Pattern to having as near complete freedom as being alive in Creation can allow, and with knowledge that it is so. He could see the world as a 20 years old again, a world in which to love, a life determined by his choices, a world to discover with new eyes and in which to build his own happiness and path.

 

Sure, by the end of the confrontation Rand has embraced the Augustine view that there can be no Good without the possibility of Evil to define it and without the possibility of choosing to be good instead of bad, but that's nothing he gained from Moridin. All he gained and retained from Elan Morin is during the confrontation the conviction that a world without free will is meaningless and evil. That Elan Morin was right about, but only that.

 

The souls of Moridin and Rand were always connected, and for a while they touched, and in future lives they'll be connected again (Brandon strongly hinted their relationship isn't dissimilar to Birgitte-Gaidal). As Rand "rode away in the sunset", the two souls had gone their own ways again, one choosing death and the boon of a wiped slate and memories and the other life and memories, switching bodies to make it happen.

Edited by Suttree
Link to post
Share on other sites

Moridin was 100% right.

 

Their free will depends on outside influences and thus isn't any kind of free will at all.

 

Pieces on a shara board.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are no 'influences', just the existence of options among which to choose. Free will requires such options to be available, or it is not truly free. In Randland the options are the Creator and the Dark One - and possibly also Shaisam (sp?). Randlanders can choose to follow any of these, but to do so they have to be aware of their existence, not 'influenced' by them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@suttree+dom

"notably because elan choosing the dying body to get the only oblivion he can"

on the contrary,in my opinion,moridin did not choose to do anything,rand was doing

all the "choosing" for him.

it is my belief that moridin completely lost control of himself and the situation around him

the moment he decided to pick up callandor off the floor,from that point until his cremation,

he was just a conduit for the true power and later a vessel for rand's soul.

it was a trap well planned and beautifully executed by a trio of friends working in tandem

and trusting each other completely.

rand used moridin's state of mind,his fixation with oblivion if you will,to his full advantage,

and his warning against channeling the true power in the pit achieved exactly the opposite

of course:"it is oblivion!"moridin yelled."i will know that release,lews therin.i will take you with me".

rand was running out of time and he knew it,his body was dying from blood loss,so no,in the end,

sad and misguided elan morin tedronai did not voluntarily choose to do anything,he was forcefully

evicted from his own body,and  like you said,"embracing death"and wanting to die are not the same,

rand was willing to pay the ultimate price to save the world,but never wanted to die,especially not after

his epiphany.

Edited by jack of shadows
Link to post
Share on other sites

There are no 'influences', just the existence of options among which to choose. Free will requires such options to be available, or it is not truly free. In Randland the options are the Creator and the Dark One - and possibly also Shaisam (sp?). Randlanders can choose to follow any of these, but to do so they have to be aware of their existence, not 'influenced' by them.

The DO isn't described as "the option of evil."

 

He IS the very concept of evil, and the BWB explicitly states his effect amplifies evil in people the weaker his prison. Right after that very scene he reminds Rand he can make people do evil totally against their will.

 

His existence corrupts free will. Except for when free will depends on it to exist, to then be corrupted by him. Or something.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There are no 'influences', just the existence of options among which to choose. Free will requires such options to be available, or it is not truly free. In Randland the options are the Creator and the Dark One - and possibly also Shaisam (sp?). Randlanders can choose to follow any of these, but to do so they have to be aware of their existence, not 'influenced' by them.

The DO isn't described as "the option of evil."

 

He IS the very concept of evil, and the BWB explicitly states his effect amplifies evil in people the weaker his prison. Right after that very scene he reminds Rand he can make people do evil totally against their will.

 

His existence corrupts free will. Except for when free will depends on it to exist, to then be corrupted by him. Or something.

 

The BWB isn't 100% canon, but I'd be interested in the exact quote you're referencing.

 

And your last line seems to complete miss the distinction between existing and meddling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The DO isn't described as "the option of evil."

Right, that's because we were misled (like Moridin) until the end of the books. That's kinda what that whole post is about. Thanks for catching up.

 

You need both. End of story. Literally.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

There are no 'influences', just the existence of options among which to choose. Free will requires such options to be available, or it is not truly free. In Randland the options are the Creator and the Dark One - and possibly also Shaisam (sp?). Randlanders can choose to follow any of these, but to do so they have to be aware of their existence, not 'influenced' by them.

The DO isn't described as "the option of evil."

 

He IS the very concept of evil, and the BWB explicitly states his effect amplifies evil in people the weaker his prison. Right after that very scene he reminds Rand he can make people do evil totally against their will.

 

His existence corrupts free will. Except for when free will depends on it to exist, to then be corrupted by him. Or something.

The BWB isn't 100% canon, but I'd be interested in the exact quote you're referencing.

 

And your last line seems to complete miss the distinction between existing and meddling.

It's quoted in a different thread about this topic, forget which one.

 

You're misreading the sentence I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The DO isn't described as "the option of evil."

Right, that's because we were misled (like Moridin) until the end of the books. That's kinda what that whole post is about. Thanks for catching up.

 

You need both. End of story. Literally.

"We were mislead until the end of the books" is another way of saying "Brandon's decision is inconsistent with the rest of the books" which is my point, so thanks for rephrasing it as if it's a new contribution to the discussion.

 

We weren't mislead, however. RJ didn't come up with the new definition of the DO, Brandon did (see Raleigh signing thread). And Brandon didn't worry about how it fit into the world RJ built.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

The DO isn't described as "the option of evil."

Right, that's because we were misled (like Moridin) until the end of the books. That's kinda what that whole post is about. Thanks for catching up.

 

You need both. End of story. Literally.

"We were mislead until the end of the books" is another way of saying "Brandon's decision is inconsistent with the rest of the books" which is my point, so thanks for rephrasing it as if it's a new contribution to the discussion.

 

We weren't mislead, however. RJ didn't come up with the new definition of the DO, Brandon did (see Raleigh signing thread). And Brandon didn't worry about how it fit into the world RJ built.

 

 

jjp

 

If you are right, then that means that Team Jordan and the editor of all of the WOT books, Harriet, also mislead the readers in the final three books concerning the nature of the Dark One. 

 

Therefore, who should a reader think is correct about the definition of the Dark One?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing in the final three books prefigured this twist, read the Raleigh thread. Harriet told Brandon to make the final confrontation with the DO more interesting and this, in his next draft, was the result - the two prior books were already written.

 

The DO wasn't like that in his first draft. Why would he be???

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing in the final three books prefigured this twist, read the Raleigh thread. Harriet told Brandon to make the final confrontation with the DO more interesting and this, in his next draft, was the result - the two prior books were already written.

 

The DO wasn't like that in his first draft. Why would he be???

 

The competing-worlds duel was definitely Brandon. The paraphrased answer in the Raleigh thread isn't as explicit as you say it is, anyway. The DO and Rand originally had just a conversation. Likely he tried to tempt Rand in the same way, and we've no reason yet to think that Jordan's version didn't result in Rand coming to the same conclusion.

 

The ending makes perfect sense, so much so that I'm surprised we didn't come to that very same conclusion earlier. The Wheel of Time is about balance. We have our answer about why we needed to be so concerned about Rand's state of mind and why it mattered how he went to the Last Battle. This type of conclusion was hinted at even in tGS and ToM, before it was suggested that Brandon make the confrontation more "interesting". We should have foreseen the Dark One's continuing existence being necessary. We just didn't ask the question, because we assumed that killing him would be an impossibility.

 

And if this whole theme that came out of that ending was Brandon and Brandon only (which I don't believe it is, but IF it is) then I think it's one of the things he did right.

Edited by Agitel
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Nothing in the final three books prefigured this twist, read the Raleigh thread. Harriet told Brandon to make the final confrontation with the DO more interesting and this, in his next draft, was the result - the two prior books were already written.

 

The DO wasn't like that in his first draft. Why would he be???

The competing-worlds duel was definitely Brandon. The paraphrased answer in the Raleigh thread isn't as explicit as you say it is, anyway. The DO and Rand originally had just a conversation. Likely he tried to tempt Rand in the same way, and we've no reason yet to think that Jordan's version didn't result in Rand coming to the same conclusion.

 

The ending makes perfect sense, so much so that I'm surprised we didn't come to that very same conclusion earlier. The Wheel of Time is about balance. We have our answer about why we needed to be so concerned about Rand's state of mind and why it mattered how he went to the Last Battle. This type of conclusion was hinted at even in tGS and ToM, before it was suggested that Brandon make the confrontation more "interesting". We should have foreseen the Dark One's continuing existence being necessary. We just didn't ask the question, because we assumed that killing him would be an impossibility.

 

And if this whole theme that came out of that ending was Brandon and Brandon only (which I don't believe it is, but IF it is) then I think it's one of the things he did right.

You're conflating the entire ending - which did have much foreshadowing and worked on some levels - with a specific part of it, my problem is with the revelation that evil in the world exists only if the DO does, and that is why he had to be sealed, or free will would vanish. I was fine with him being sealed for a reason that actually made sense.

 

Rand's state of mind has nothing to do with that. He decided in VoG not to wipe the world out, being offered oblivion again was redundant, he already made that choice when he rediscovered LOVE, something the DO and Moridin knew not of. His struggle with becoming like Moridin ended on Dragonmount, not the Pit of Doom. Tossing in the free free will thing was a clumsy attempt to raise the stakes of the confrontation.

 

It would still be "all about balance" if evil was abstract, like in the entire series up to that point, and the DO evil by description, rather than the essence of.

 

Besides, where is the balance in a Creator who refuses to interfere and a DO who does nothing but interfere to the point that people need to fight him off with no help from the Creator?

 

Wouldn't they both be locked in an infinite struggle with each other if it was really "all about balance?"

 

I can't stress it enough, this wasn't even in Brandon's first draft. He said himself the DO wasn't like this at first. So if everything was leading up to it, why did he suddenly forget when sitting down to pen the first draft of the final confrontation of the entire series?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Brandon and/or Harriet specifically say what part about the Dark One's confrontation with Rand was changed after Sanderson's first draft?

 

That is something which I really want to know... exactly  what  in that scene did Sanderson change after being encouraged to do so by Harriet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Brandon and/or Harriet specifically say what part about the Dark One's confrontation with Rand was changed after Sanderson's first draft?

 

That is something which I really want to know... exactly  what  in that scene did Sanderson change after being encouraged to do so by Harriet?

 

It was originally more of a conversation between Rand and the DO instead of the back and forth with the possible worlds. Harriet sent the draft back to Brandon and said it wasn't climactic/exciting enough, and Brandon agreed. That's what we know specifically. jjp's arguing that the idea that killing the Dark One would eliminate choice was Brandon also and claims it doesn't make sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Brandon and/or Harriet specifically say what part about the Dark One's confrontation with Rand was changed after Sanderson's first draft?

 

That is something which I really want to know... exactly  what  in that scene did Sanderson change after being encouraged to do so by Harriet?

 

From the Raleigh signing:

 

Q: Was it up to you to decide what the Dark One actually was? The revelation that the Dark One was a concept or idea rather than a person reminded me very much of Ruin from the “The Hero of Ages.” How did you make that decision?

Brandon: I was left a lot of freedom on how to do that specific thing, and earlier in the first draft he wasn’t so much like that. We felt the conflict wasn’t working—it felt more like the Last Conversation than the Last Battle. Harriet sent back direction for something stronger. The revision included the dueling of possibilities. That is where the Dark One became more involved and so it evolved into that, but we weren’t following anything specific Jim had said.

 

So Brandon specifically said "the dueling of possibilities" was his, and they "weren't following anything specific Jim had said."

 

[*Edited for punctuation typo]

Edited by Erdrick
Link to post
Share on other sites

@jjp,

"rand state of mind has nothing to do with that.he decided in vog not to wipe the world out"

"his struggle with becoming like moridin ended on dragonmount,not the pit of doom."

i couldn't agree with you more,after his dragonmount epiphany rand was a changed man,and for

the better.

he became a better person,well,a more balanced one,and a better overall leader.

rand said that everything went wrong(for him)after moiraine was gone,and maybe it was,but for me

it was dumai's wells.his incarceration was a big catalyst in his downward spiral,and for the first time

since that battle he was able to restrain his "madness" and move forward again.

so if anthing,rand entered the pit of doom(with moiraine by his side) in the best state of mind we could

possibly have  hoped  for.

Edited by jack of shadows
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

BenevolentCow, your post actually highlights for me one of the primary sources of that feeling of hopelessness that I've been having trouble getting my finger on. Your post helped me realize that it's not just the cyclic repetition that bothers me, but also that sense of "balance" like there can only be so much good in the world. What's the point of doing good deeds if that just means the pattern will eventually "balance" it out by making something crappy happen to someone else down the line.

 

 

 

 

How exactly is this different from the world we exist in? Just because there are nations around the world where children die of hunger every few minutes doesn't stop you and me doing the few good deeds we are capable of.

 

My first suggestion is to read my post more carefully, but perhaps you could also use a little more context for the discussion. An argument was being made for the DO's continued connection to the pattern being thematically necessary. BenevelentCow (I love that name, by the way) was presenting the idea of good and evil being "balanced" by the pattern, pointing to the ta'veren effect causing both good and bad things to happen.

 

Now, I always took that particular ta'veren effect to be just a distortion of chance (a flattening out of probability curves, if you will). That would result in unlikely chance events being much more likely, which would include things that are "good" (a child falls off a building and survives with only minor injuries), "bad" (a man stumbles over a pebble and breaks his neck), and "neutral" (two women unable to pass each other in a street because they keep turning to the same direction at the same time).

 

On the other hand, let's assume it is good and evil that must be "balanced" by the pattern. That may sound nice at first, especially since we are reading about a time where evil is dominant, so it leads to a lot of fortunate accidences occurring to help our heroes. But upon closer inspection, it seems to imply there is a fixed good to evil ratio that must be maintained. What happens if through collective hard work and self-sacrifice, ingenuity, overcoming of prejudices, and other noble achievements lead humanity to an age of prosperity greater than the fixed amount designated for that period on the Wheel. Does that mean the pattern begins to weave an abundance of bad things to reestablish its "balance?"

 

Here's where the problem of ethics comes into play. In that scenario, the pattern does the "balancing," so what is the motivation for an individual to make moral choices? If there is an abundance of good in the world, the pattern will work to make things worse, and any good deeds I do will result in the pattern working harder to bring things back to "balance." Similarly, if there is an abundance of evil, why struggle against it when we have the pattern to do our good works for us?

 

So, in response to randalthorr's comment, that scenario is (I believe) very different from the world we live in. There is no cosmic force insisting on a particular ratio of good and evil, so please do keep up the valiant fight to reduce worldsuck (to borrow a term from nerdfightoria). I'm right there with you on that.

 

By the way, I kept using quotation marks around the word "balance" above because I don't think it makes sense with respect to good and evil. I always took the theme of balance in the WoT to be very Taoist (especially with the prevalent use of what is basically the taijitu symbol). In Taoism, the contrasting/complementary concepts of yin and yang are very nicely represented in the descriptions of Saidin and Saidar. The yin-yang dynamic is active vs passive, hard vs soft, firm vs yielding, and so on, but NOT good vs evil. This is all somewhat related to the ongoing debate on this site about the necessity of the DO, which is a discussion I've been trying to avoid. Though, perhaps it's time for me to rejoin the fray.

 

Edited by Erdrick
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Jack of Shadows - I was reviewing my old posts on p.33 of this thread and I just found your comment at the bottom:
 

@erdrick,

i asked for an aternate ending,and you gave me a good one.

i prefer your ending to the one written in the book.(after much delibaration i must say).

it is my understanding that the crux of what you wrote in three or four posts is this:

the cyclic nature of the wheel of time with its endless repetition of "last" battles works

in the dark one's favor,he has to win only once and it's game over for the world.

so simple,yet so very true.

rand won this "last" battle and rode off into the sunset happy and free,but what about tomorrow?

unfortunately we all know the answer to that: in a very small village a young shepherd........

sorry to drag you back into this mess erdrick hahaha,i just can't get enough of this beautiful mess.

Thanks for approaching my replies with an open mind. To be fair, the argument about the cyclic nature making the DO's victory inevitable was Ishamael's, and that is what motivated him to join the Shadow. As an AoL philosopher, I see how his conclusions (and subsequent actions) earned him the title "Betrayer of Hope." Perhaps that conclusion is mistaken, and there really is no chance of ultimate victory for the DO. There's still something I find unsatisfying about that endless cyclic repetition, but I guess that's just the world RJ intended.

By the way, this is from an interview I recently found in Theoryland's database:
 

Interview: May, 2001
Marcon Report - Sorilea (Paraphrased)

Question
At one point in the story we see Ishamael talking to Rand, and telling him that they have fought countless times in the past, but this is the final time. Is there anything about his Age that makes it special?

Robert Jordan
"No...every Age is repeated, there is nothing that makes this age any different from any other turnings of the Wheel. The Wheel is endless."


I kind of wish I found this earlier, so that I could have adjusted my expectations accordingly. Even though the ending wasn't all I hoped for, I still enjoyed it overall. That is the story RJ wanted to tell, and I appreciate that he shared it with us.

However, let me be clear that I am not talking about being happy with that nonsense about the absolute necessity of the DO. I was relieved to hear that the "dueling possibilities" (specifically the one where everybody becomes vapid and friffy without the DO) were not from RJ's notes, athough I would be right there with jjp calling out the bad philosophy and textual inconsistencies even if they were. I have a lot of homework to do, and really shouldn't be spending all this time online, but maybe later I'll find the time to give jjp some backup on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

The DO isn't described as "the option of evil."

Right, that's because we were misled (like Moridin) until the end of the books. That's kinda what that whole post is about. Thanks for catching up.

 

You need both. End of story. Literally.

 

 

"We were mislead until the end of the books" is another way of saying "Brandon's decision is inconsistent with the rest of the books" which is my point, so thanks for rephrasing it as if it's a new contribution to the discussion.

 

We weren't mislead, however. RJ didn't come up with the new definition of the DO, Brandon did (see Raleigh signing thread). And Brandon didn't worry about how it fit into the world RJ built.

 

 

 

 

jjp

 

If you are right, then that means that Team Jordan and the editor of all of the WOT books, Harriet, also mislead the readers in the final three books concerning the nature of the Dark One. 

 

Therefore, who should a reader think is correct about the definition of the Dark One?

 

 

We were misled by the characters. The only interpretations we can get in these books are from the Character's PoVs. We learnt what they understood the nature of the DO to be. Just as Moridin was wrong, so was Rand and the whole side of the Light. At least until the very end. I don't understand how that doesn't make sense. It makes perfect sense. The entire series is narrated by limited 3rd person unreliable focus characters. That's why we get to come here and argue about whats true and whats false.
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...