Kinda stupid trying to bring armies to intimidate the Dragon when a large portion of the armies you are bringing are sworn to the Dragon himself?..It really makes no sense.

So what message do you think is given out by having Rand's own armies there to oppose him? When even your allies and bannermen consider your plans foolish and reckless? Who would still proceed under those circumstances?

 

 

 

 

 

And if he disregards her as he intends to...what can she do?

 

The Steward of Illian and Tear are a lot more scared of the Dragon than the Amyrlin. She knows that, she also knows if push comes to shove the Aiel will support Rand. He is their own blood and their chief, their ties are a lot more than hers to the Aiel. So basically all she is counting on is the support of Rand's lover...er..How stupid of a plan is this?

It really isn't a "plan" at all. It is what was required of her by the Pattern, imposed on her by Rand's ta'veren influence. Since it isn't really a plan, or even truely the result of conscious thought on her part, she get's a pass on how stupid it is.

She doesn't get a pass on not having alternatives in the works, or many other things she has done (or failed to do). But that's another thread.

Tear and Illian did not even want to come..not sure if they came with full force, if they did and their countries got attacked thin Egwene is plainly at fault there too.

Much as I despise Egwene, I cannot agree. Neither country should be sending troops to the FoM because Egwene wants to play soldier. That's the rulers' fault, not Egwene's.

How is it her fault? She does not know the Seanchan know Traveling nor does she know about the Waygate. She was informed there would be an invasion so she did what was needed. When one hears hoofbeats, one thinks of horses not zebras just like Elayne focused on securing her borders. According to your logic every single ruler at the FoM is criminally negligent. The Borderlanders most of all it seems. Doesn't make sense to me.

1. She knows that Traveling is a possibility, and therefore a danger;

2. She SHOULD know that the Seanchan have taken women who know the traveling weave prisoner. If she doesn't, THAT is Egwene's fault;

3. She knows about Raken and To'Raken;

4. We don't actually know if she knows about the Waygate or not. She might very well.

5. Her borders are with countries not overrun by the Seanchan of the Shadow, which ought to strongly suggest that she show a little more imagination;

6. She has said herself that Caemlyn IS Andor. Border raids are not the danger;

7. All of these points notwithstanding, going might be a risk she had to take, IF there were a compelling reason to do so. There is not.

8. "Wah, wah, others do it too!" is not a defense. Yes, many other leaders have been negligent. Not the Borderlanders; they knew the cost but had that compelling reason that Elayne does not. But Tear and Illian, certainly.

No, Elayne has no one but herself to blame. She has advance notice of an invasion of Shadowspawn, knows for certain that the Seanchan are coming and can strike anywhere, and her only response is to "beef up" her border defenses, with what can at most be a few tens of thousands of troops, spread around the border of the largest kingdom in Randland. To leave her country, taking with her so much as a single soldier, is almost criminally negligent.

And I say this as not exactly the biggest Egwene fan out there. Not Egwene's fault, Elayne's.

rtyerwgh

The Asha'man shouldn't have used Compulsion on the Aes Sedai who invaded their homes seeking to gentle and kill them. They should have killed them all. And no, I'm not joking, not even a little bit.

I find Perrin's "Anything for Faile, and the world can go to hell before I let her come to harm!" attitude grating at times, too. But, sorry, the blame lies on Perrin's shoulders for that. He's very in love with Faile, that's how he sees her. I imagine he would have the same attitude had he fallen in love with any other woman in the series- Berelain, Alliandre, Egwene, Nynaeve, anyone. Its simply how he is. Its not necessarily a good thing, and he does feel bad about it afterwards, as I recall, but I don't blame Faile for it.

 

I think Perrin and Faile are possibly the "closest" relationship in the series, which might explain Perrin's very strong attachment to, and determination when it comes to his wife. Not to imply that the other characters love each other less, but the two of them have been married since Book 4, spent time together in the Two Rivers, have been together for a lot of the time since then, and work very closely together. There is Faile's capture, of course, by the Shaido, and various other points at which they are separated, but apart from the Shaido arc, they're together for the majority of the time, across a large part of the series. Its not so surprising that Perrin felt lost without her.

Also, Faile is all Perrin has left, his entire family having been slaughtered.

Thank you, David. I wanted to point that out but don't have ToM here, and so couldn't have proved it.

 

 

That is funny because I was thinking the same about you. For the record I do believe that, I don't think anyone should be forced into a lifestyle or position if they choose otherwise. What I said was perfectly reasonable and elaborated upon, you are just finding excuses to hate the character.

As my initial post makes quite clear, I DON'T hate the character. But she is not a flawless human being, and one of the flaws she has is hypocrisy.

As for being forced into a lifestyle or position: She lived a life of great privilege by the sweat of other people's brows. She does owe them a moral debt. Ideally, there would be no hereditary nobility leaching off the hard-working commoners. But if there must be, then those nobles should for damn sure fulfill their end of the bargain.

Fine, then she should pay back the common people of Tyr and Sidona for all of the money extorted from them to pay for her upbringing, education, clothing, etc.

 

THEN she is free to follow her bliss.

 

Logic so bad it makes my head hurt terribly.

 

 

Faile is a noble. Nobles have obligations in exchange for the benefits they receive.

 

Right. Such as all the Tairen, Cairheinen and other nobles that spend the majority of their time gambling, drinking and wenching. When they aren't spitting on and stringing up commoners for petty and arbitrary reasons of course. Just because someone is born to a certain station does not mean they are inherently indebted to maintain it (or deserve it for that matter). She did not run off and keep collecting benefits, she made a clean break.

 

The money you claim was extorted from the commoners was her father's anyhow, taxes were not collected or paid to her. He spent it as he saw fit in the upbringing of his children like any parent would. She also ran a number of his affairs until she left hence paying off her debts through work. So there.

Oh, please. You don't even believe that.

Fine, then she should pay back the common people of Tyr and Sidona for all of the money extorted from them to pay for her upbringing, education, clothing, etc.

 

THEN she is free to follow her bliss.

 

Logic so bad it makes my head hurt terribly.

Faile is a noble. Nobles have obligations in exchange for the benefits they receive.

Well by your definition so did Rand, Perrin, Mat, Egwene, Moiraine, Nynaeve, Loial, Elayne, Min, Davrem Bashere, Logain, Mazrim Tiam, Renald Fanwar, Tuon, Almen Bunt, Gawyn, Galad, Gareth Bryne, Morgase, etc. Pretty much every character in the series has abandoned their home and responsibilities for adventure or a greater role in the Pattern. Faile just wants Perrin to stand up and be a man, but I guess it would have been more fun to read about him staying in bed all day and moping.

Logic so bad it makes my head hurt.

Fine, then she should pay back the common people of Tyr and Sidona for all of the money extorted from them to pay for her upbringing, education, clothing, etc.

THEN she is free to follow her bliss.

Faile is very, very young, the youngest of the main characters. I think you have to take that into account when reading her.

 

She is brave, she is clever, she is loyal, she is hot, and she is at least slightly kinky. What's not to like? It's not her fault her husband got all emo when she was missing. (Not really his fault, either, but that's a different thread.)

 

I don't even find the jealousy irritating; it's realistic. And, let's remember, it's not like she was imagining things where Berelain was concerned.

 

What I do find irritating is the hypocrisy. She's always insisting that Perrin step up to his responsibilities, right? From practically the first moment we meet her? But what did she do? She ran away, abandoning her own responsibilities, to seek adventure.

 

I like her too, I just wish she would speak her bloody mind sometimes. Perrin´s nose just confuses him sometimes. The jealousy is realistic in someone who has jealousy issues, which she has. I dk if you can see that as hypocrisy, she is as you said young. Young people tend to shy away from responsibilities...

Yeah, that's fair enough. Although usually those young people shying away from responsibility will refrain from lecturing other people about the need to be responsible.

Faile is very, very young, the youngest of the main characters. I think you have to take that into account when reading her.

 

She is brave, she is clever, she is loyal, she is hot, and she is at least slightly kinky. What's not to like? It's not her fault her husband got all emo when she was missing. (Not really his fault, either, but that's a different thread.)

 

I don't even find the jealousy irritating; it's realistic. And, let's remember, it's not like she was imagining things where Berelain was concerned.

 

What I do find irritating is the hypocrisy. She's always insisting that Perrin step up to his responsibilities, right? From practically the first moment we meet her? But what did she do? She ran away, abandoning her own responsibilities, to seek adventure.

 

Her reason for running wasn't to get away from responsibility per se but from a life she didn't want. Had staying in Saldea satisfied her I am sure she would have jumped in with both feet.

That's pretty much the definition of running away from responsibility.

In Perrin's case he is right where he wants to be but tries to be a lazy slacker accountable to only himself, she is just doing her wifely duty of giving him a kick in the ass.

He's not trying to be a lazy slacker. He's uncomfortable with the idea of becoming a lord to people who never needed or wanted a lord before. Rightly.

Faile is very, very young, the youngest of the main characters. I think you have to take that into account when reading her.

She is brave, she is clever, she is loyal, she is hot, and she is at least slightly kinky. What's not to like? It's not her fault her husband got all emo when she was missing. (Not really his fault, either, but that's a different thread.)

I don't even find the jealousy irritating; it's realistic. And, let's remember, it's not like she was imagining things where Berelain was concerned.

What I do find irritating is the hypocrisy. She's always insisting that Perrin step up to his responsibilities, right? From practically the first moment we meet her? But what did she do? She ran away, abandoning her own responsibilities, to seek adventure.

To paraphrase Kissinger, Egwene doesn't have friends, she has interests.

i'm getting confused as to whether this thread is about women in the WOT or women IRL? all, what, 3.5 billion of us?

 

and i'm wondering whether some fans tend to be a bit confused as to whether women in the WOT are actually women IRL, or somehow represent women IRL.

 

because, they're not even written by a woman. they're all manifestations of the author's mind, his opinions, thoughts, creativity, preferences, biases, etc.

 

but a lot of people seem to react to these characters as if they are not only RL women, but women (and men, sorry, don't mean to be non-inclusive) whom they know and dislike IRL.

 

it seems that if there are "issues" with the characters in a book, the real "issue" would be with the creator/author?

 

i know this has been said before; please excuse the repeat. but it's sad to see every similar topic mired this same way.

Here's how that happens.

There's a thread about women in tWoT. Or about a female character.

Some people express irritation with those female characters.

Other posters immediately counter with an argument along the lines of, "If you don't like (female character X/the characterization of females by this author), you must just have issues with women in RL, and/or you just need to grow up a bit. Damn whippersnappers, why in my day we walked to school, in the snow, up hill both ways..."

And then we're off and running.

It is indeed common to hear not only women jest among themselves about men, which might often be characterized as fond complaints.

Yet far more appalling, indeed hateful, is what is too often said by many men to each other about women in the most negative and objectifying sense.

That is the truth of our society, though I would give credit where it is due to men of higher consciousness than a chauvinist. And credit to some women and men who have raised their children to have respect for others and self respect.

 

Those who complain about WoT women to excess seem to be either so young as to have little experience of actual societal relations in all their contradictions and variayions, but there are some fewer here who may be chauvinist themselves and have trouble with the tables being turned.

 

Live and learn. Live and learn.

I find the notion that, "you just don't understand because you're a kid" to be not much different, in its' essential qualities, from, "you just don't understand because you're not a man."

And I'm 43.

I started a whole thread about how people's reactions to WoT characters were determined largely by the age and gender of the reader. It was somewhat depressing how few people challenged the premise.

As for women's talk about men being, "fond complaints" while men's comments about women are, "negative and objectifying..." Well, let's just say you might find it fruitful to examine your own tendencies toward chauvinism.

He's probabaly just worried that you want to look at his hairless bottom-cheeks.

Your spouse begins a long, rambling conversation...but it doesn't bother you a bit. You think, "By the time 20 years have gone by, she'll probably be almost done. That's not so bad."

Stephen King is and always has been a hack. He's Danielle Steele with an ego and a penchant for taking a 100 page novel and squeezing 850 pages out of it, a pop culture parasite remnant of the lost generation whose moderate talent for spinning a good yarn was long ago done in by an inflated sense of his own worth as a, and I use this word lightly, literary figure. He thinks himself Edgar Allen Poe but he's pure pulp and with possible exception of the film adaptations that Frank Darabont has made, destined to be forgotten and insignificant in 2, possibly 3 generations after his death.

 

Sorry, a little aside there, totally uncalled for, I admit. I humbly apologize.

While I basically agree with you about King, I do find this:

a penchant for taking a 100 page novel and squeezing 850 pages out of it

to be ironic, coming from a fan of Robert Jordan.

There have been two Sanderson books. Neither is in the top five books in the series, in my opinion. On the other hand, they are nowhere close to the worst books in the series. The idea that the worst Jordan book is ten times better than the best Sanderson book? Absurd.

i was surprised to note that the overhwelming majority cross under. i would have guessed over, but apparently RJ's more observant than me.

Or his attention was just focussed differently.

sniff

tug

plump

rounded

more-than-pretty