Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY

KakitaOCU

Member
  • Content Count

    146
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by KakitaOCU

  1. Aside from what Barid said I'd also contest the idea that having a set purpose or pull in the pattern denies free will. In TGS Tam explained it very clearly on one level "You may have to fight, but you get to decide WHY you fight." It's a topic covered in a lot of places. Sword of Truth (I know, I know, blasphemy) made a big point that prophecy needed free will to function, being a yin and yang type of conflict/driving force. The Recluce Saga makes a VERY strong arguement towards free will despite inevitable ends. The stance is basically "Yes, everything will fail in the end, every empire dies, every person dies, everything we do will be forgotten, or distored to unrecognizability. That's why our own choices matter so much. If the Only thing that's changeable or different is our personal choices and what they mean to us and those we interact with, then those choices become infinately more important." Even in the real world, in a sense, things are predestined. We are mortal, we will eventually run out of fossil fuels. Rome fell and someday, somewhere in the future the countries as we know them today will not exist. But regardless of that, what you do, what you choose, matters immensely, because it's your way of bringing meaning to things, it's your only true influence.
  2. I don't really feel like RJ left no notes. Just think maybe no notes on her ultimate fate. He could very easily have left notes showing that Cadsuane will become Amyrlin after TG. He could also have detailed in vague terms Egwene's battle against the Sharans and Taim. So it could have been the notes left BS and Harriet with a choice of have Egwene live but either be burned out or disappear. Or have her die.
  3. The Hurin thing is also a bit sketchy. I know he's said it was Hurin that he decided a death for. But then in a later panel he was very specific in saying that if RJ didn't specify live or die on a character then they lived with two specific exceptions, one Harriet chose (Siuan) and one he chose. He then specified that he wasn't revealing his at this time. So he may just have forgotten he already divulged it (Hurin) Or he might be responsible for another death. As Suttree said, a lot of this points at Egwene. (For what its worth I have no problem with Egwene death, RJ's decision or BS's.) Basic theory is that RJ's notes specify Cadsuane is Amyrlin in the end but BS had to decide between her dying or being burned out in her fight against Taim and the Sharans.
  4. He didn't decide to kill Siuan if that's what you mean. Harriet made that call. There is one character BS was responsible for killing but he hasn't said who yet.
  5. So you sided with Jasmine then? Don't mean that as any sort of flippant answer, just asking. We may just be on the opposite sides of the fence regarding the importance of our choice vs overall goodness. You may even have a point re: those in the non-free will world won't know what they're missing. But the issue isn't what they know, it's what I know on this side of the divide. I'm not willing to give up mine or other's choices and world.
  6. I believe the original story about Brandon finding out that someone dies as mentioned in the first post is Bela. Which is a sepate point from his statement about his having characters live or die based on RJ's notes and that if no notes were left they lived with the exception of two characters, on he killed and one Harriet killed. That was Siuan. I have to imagine No one really thought about Bela one way or another until she was placed in the situation she was.
  7. That's a whole new philosophical arguement, Mr. Ares. Once I don't really know that I want to delve into at the moment. Have you seen season four of angel? :)
  8. Just like yours is from not having experienced their suffering? You're making an assumption that the post has not experience such suffering. Not saying they have or have not, but assuming everyone in favor of free will lead a sheltered and happy life is a bit off.
  9. Ah, thank you, had forgotten about that quote. Hmm, wonder if Fain is kind of the Wheel's Agent Smith. The unintended glitch in the matrix that if left alone will destablize everything.
  10. @thethreadnecromancer. I'm afraid I'm not sure what you mean. How did Fain "sidestep" the pattern? To me (and again, I know this is theory, not confirmed) he was set up as a filler in case he was needed, then he wasn't needed so his thread was cut by Mat. Much like you might have a spare tire on your vehicle and through good maintenance and care never actually use said tire until it dry rots and needs to be disposed of.
  11. As a fun aside to this topic. Has anyone in this discussion watched Angel? And if so what was your thoughts on the Ending/Climax of the Season four arc? It's the same question, it's a question that comes up a LOT. Where do we draw the line between free-will vs goodness?
  12. As others have said, I really feel Fain has a purpose. It's just a purpose that was made moot when Rand chose the right path of not killing the DO. The Pattern always balances itself, Evil is needed for proper balance. Rand kills DO, Fain replaces, or at least serves the same purpose. I know this isn't confirmed anywhere but it was the theory I was looking at pretty much from Crown of Swords.
  13. Personally, I think it actually was Egwene. I think the noted specified Cadsuane becoming Amyrlin but maybe nothing as to why the seat was vacant. I can see why he wouldn't bring that up for a while, it's such a hot button issue. On top of that, from how he spoke on the topic of who wrote what it becomse very clear that he REALLY doesn't care to get into it. He even suggested that he doesn't even really remember anymore. (He remembers if something was explicitly Jordan and already written, but he said he now has trouble remembering if something he came up with was purely him or something he found burried in the notes somewhere, etc). So agree or not, I could see it being Egwene and between his feelings that it really shouldn't be looked at as him or Jordan and the fact that some fans are already on the warpatch over it, might just not be worth mentioning. Personally, I was the most intrigued by the idea that Lanfear had other plots going on that we missed, heading back to re-read to see if I can skim anything new.
  14. Yep, picked it up at PCC as well. And had the same experience with him. I think he's just used to WoT fans grilling him every chance he gets. So those of us just going "Thanks for finishing it, pleasure to meet you." threw him for a loop. :)
  15. Actually, Brandon talked about that a bit in a panel at PCC this last weekend. The Shara scene and world building was almost entirely Brandon's. He pushed heavily for it but Team Jordan made the call that it would be too distractive showing up where it does. We're ramping up to the end and then suddenly jump ship to another corner of the world to lay out an entirely new culture and people. Brandon was against it being cut but in the end agreed with Team Jordan that it was a bit displaced. Then when the Unfettered project came out he got Harriet's permission to put the chapter there since they did feel it was a good chapter and story, just not one that belongs in AMOL.
  16. So panel went well. Unfortionately the questions never really got into specifics of the series, was more about his experiences with Harriet and Team Jordan and his thoughts about the project in general. He did have a few interesting things to say about the series and story specifically though. - He stated straight out that Lanfear had additional plans in motion that can be figured out based on AMOL that none of the fandom has found yet (Or at least not posted). He was asked for specifics and gave a RAFO, then specified he meant that in terms of re-reading AMOL. - He confirmed that Lanfear's compulsion of Perrin was only in AMOL and that she didn't like using it and so had not done so in their previous meeting back in the early books. - Re: Deaths of major characters. His statement was that Jordan had left ending situations for nearly every character and that, with only two exceptions, if Jordan didn't specify, they had the character live. He confirmed one of those exceptions was Harriet's decision re: Siuan. He did not reveal the other. - The idea of Compelling the Great Captains was one he and Harriet worked up. The notes apparently just stated that several of the great captains died and then everything was given to Mat. Since it was so vague, they had to come up with a reason for WHY the world would trust Mat like that. - He acknowledged why Asmodean's killer was revealed the way it was. Apparently when he got the "Notes" from Harriet there was a sticky note on the top that just said "Graendal killed Asmodean" with no further explanation or notes. So they thought it'd be fun to provide the same type of blank answer to the rest of the community. - Re: Tuon and Arthur Hawkwings meeting. Brandon said #1: That while Hawkwing might have issues with certain aspects of Seanchan society, as a whole he would have found Tuon and her people to be awesome. He further said the reason he didn't show the conversation is because that and the fall out was supposed to be part of the outriggers that we won't see, and so Brandon wanted to leave that open the way Jordan would have. - Jordan made the decision of the True Nature of the DO. He said that straight out. He and Harriet rewrote and developed the battle the way it turned out, with the possible futures, etc. But the true key of the DO being needed for the world and Rand having to discover that and just restore the prison were Jordan's directive. - Lastly, and IMO, most important. While he stated he was paraphraing from memory, he revealed the "Two sentences" that Jordan had left for the outriggers. The first was a scene of Mat in a wool cap laying in a gutter having gambled away everything. The second was a scene with Perrin on a ship thinking that he was going to have to go kill a friend.
  17. Apologies in advance if this isn't a proper forum, didn't see anything specifying appearances and such. So, Mr. Sanderson will be at Phoenix Comicon this coming Weekend (May 23rd-May26th). He will be having two panels, one dedicated to WoT and one more general. So figured I'd post up and see if there's any question requests for when I see him. Thank you. :) Edit: And I feel silly for not finding it. Thank you.
  18. I'd like to point out that, depending on your point of view. No one has free will. Or rather, free will is not the simplicity of "complete choice" that so many want to ascribe to it. We are all guided by limits. No matter how free you are, you are shaped by your upbringing and your own conscience, you are limited by your actual ability. Some people will never be star athletes, because their own physical form places a limit they cannot overcome. I will never take a sword and stab myself in the chest, because by my upbringing, nature and personality will not ever commit such an act. Some peopel are as Mat is portrayed in the series, and no matter how much they choose to be selfish and avoid situations, keep bein heroes. On the same note some people with every intention and desire to protect freeze and flee when presented with the reality. etc, etc, etc. The arguement that we somehow would lack free will if the influence of good/evil came from an outside source is only valid and relevant if you somehow have a world that is genuinely and completely "Free". We don't have that, we never will, It's a concept like oblivion or infinity that while we can define we can in no way actually comprehend. Edit: To the line of thought specifically about god, or whichever deity you want to use not being able to know if there's multiple choices. You're assuming a deity works on the same level of dimension and concept of time as we do. For all we know "god" is all knowing. And knows exactly what we will do, because being omniscient in a multiversal setting (IE where each choice splits) would mean s/he/it could and would follow every possible eventuality. Maybe we have choice AND the divine knows what we'll do in the same way the scene in Premium Rush shows Wiley analyzing and understanding every move he could make and what the result would be, only on a supremely grander scale. Or to put it even simpler. Maybe whatever the divine is just knows you well enough that even with "free will" it can predict. I know my son's behavior backwards and forwards, I know exactly how he'll respond to almost any situation. I have been surprised all of once ever. Now that's a case of one human vs another. As a human I have limited knowledge and weaknesses that in theory a creator figure may not have. If I can replicate a situation within our own limits, giving the idea that a divine being can do it on a grander scale isn't hard to believe, assuming we agree on there being a divine in the first place.
  19. So just touching on the point brought up of "If the Pattern balances, why bother doing good." This is covered very well in the book itself, the CHOICE to do the right thing is what makes the right thing worth while and noble. The deliberate decision to take an action that is not the easiest or in your best interest because it's what is "right" is the noble act, not the act itself. L.E. Modesitt Jr's Colors of Chaos covers this very well near the end of the book. Everything ends, every nation will eventually fall, every leader will pass away, every good deed will eventually be for nothing. Every person will be forgotten, or corrupted so far by myth that they don't resemble the truth in any way. This is why being good matters so much. When the only potential difference, the only potential impact, is the choice itself and what you decide to do. Then that choice becomes, in my opinion, infinately more important.
  20. Suttree, his talent is that they open faster, he doesn't need to memorize landscape he's on. He has an easier time making them. But the orientation is something others were doing, so that's not unique to him. His only real edge in the Lava Gate situation is that he opens them fast. But from what I read I don't get the impression that it's instant vs a one minute thing, more like, instant vs a few seconds. Logain had him do it for that speed edge, but there's no reason that I can find that anyone else would have been unable to open a gateway to Dragonmount like that. Don't get me wrong, it was better that Androl did it vs others in terms of effectiveness, but not by a level that would make the tactic bad for anyone else to have done. As for LOTR, Tolkien wrote it as one book in a two volume set (other being Silmarillion). Publisher, for economic reasons, forced it into being three books. Author wanted it to be one novel, but it was published in three and the community as a whole thinks of it as three. The same is going to be true with TGS/ToM/AMoL. The majority of the fan base and probably the literary world doesn't really care what was intended originally, they're going to see three volumes with three titles and consider it three books.
  21. No, it doesn't. By your own definition it doesn't. Nothing Androl did was unique to him, nothing was an act that was impossible for anyone else to accomplish. Again, if you want to be unhappy because you think he's a late comer and took away focus from other Ashaman, great. I don't agree, but that's fine. But claiming he's a Deus Ex is false. Sorry. Looking at your definition we have "Deus Ex Machina: A person or thing (as in fiction or drama) that appears or is introduced suddenly and unexpectedly and provides a contrived solution to an apparently insoluble difficulty." So first of all, the person or thing appearing suddenly and unexpectedly. Androl was around in WH. Second we have the contrived solution: Androl's talent is unique to him but not unique in general, we have someone who couldn't make accepted who could make a shield that Nynaeve couldn't break, others are inately gifted at healing, Aviendha can just read Ter'Angreal, etc, etc. as a kind of 1.5 let's look at the unexpected part of one and the contrived of two. The use of gateways. First, Androl's not the only one experimenting, the Gray's are all of it. Second, nothing he does with Gateways really covers anything that basic understanding of reality couldn't give you. If anything the fandom's been curious that Rand and others weren't trying similar stunts earlier. Now for the Third, Apparently insurmountable difficulty. We don't see this. Again, none of the three major actions Androl undertakes are events that couldn't have been solved by others with different methods or approaches. That third point needs to be a situation where the heroes have no way to win at all if you remove the theoretical Deus Ex. Take away Androl and Logain leads the Ashaman in covering Elayne's retreat, basically re-enacting Maradon. And that's the simple and easy solution, let alone if anyone starts getting creative. Suttree, I know we're pretty much at a standstill on this, but doesn't matter that it was planned as one. It was printed as three and is now three. I guess I could ask, as a related question. Do you consider Lord of the Rings one book? Edit: Thought I'd add in the points about the definition MSH is using instead of just saying "No, you're wrong."
  22. Cyber covered the gateway issue. Any channeler, given the idea or desire to do so, could open a gateway to a lava tube, or the bottom of the ocean, or the vacuum of space, etc. Beyond that, again, your going on this idea that ONLY the new super gateway power could solve these problems. All three of those could be handled in a number of ways, none of which need a gateway. Logain's rescue could have come from Naef or Narishma very easily. Instead of using gateways to redirect enemy weaves just have solid fighters used to war who outfight Taim. Saving Elayne's army would be much the same. Logain knows almost all of the destructive Weaves Rand does (Having seen them at the Manor battle). He easily could have just taken a near full circle and laid waste. Any male channeler with some acting ability could have pulled off the stunt with the Seals. Emarin per chance? If you want to complain that Androl's use meant that other Ashaman didn't get to shine, that's fine. I even agree with you on that to an extent. But claiming he's some deus ex when clearly there are several solutions to each problem he solves. A Deus Ex happens when the good guys are legitimately going to lose and there is literally no option for them to take at all. Then something we've never even heard of shows up. A Deus ex would be some, before unknown salvation. If the enemy forces had destroyed Elayne's army and Logain's and were about to win and there were no good channelers left andAndrol had never existed before the lava tube scene, Or we had never heard of the Horn of Valere before Olver blew it. Those would be Deus Ex's. Established characters doing something that others are capable of as well. That's just the plot
  23. mbuehner, agreed, was kind of annoying to see it devolve into a basic fire fight. But it does kind of make sense. I hate to give credit to Goodkind, but he had one of his wizard's explain it well. With channelers on both sides, doing their jobs right, it'll almost look like there's no magic going on at all. Anything truly complex would be exposed to being negated, blocked, cut, etc as it establishes, so in the end, you go with raw destruction because it's almost instant. Suttree, I'd have paid for that, just for the reaction from Felix. Rhienne, I'm very curious about that as well, also if there was any forshadowing. I've seen bonds like that happen before (Modesitt Jr's Recluce saga uses them extensively) and they're always fun, so was a pleasant surprise to see it pop up.
  24. MSH. Considering we could have had the exacty same problem solved via said circle of men and women pulling what Rand did at Maradon with the multiple attacks? Dealing with that army was a matter of raw power usage, nothing more. His lava trick was very cool, very neat and memorable, and ultimately no more destructive to the enemy forces than other displays we've seen from other channelers. As for the Deus Ex and Mary Sue issues. The first requires an idea coming out of nowhere that was never thought of expected. We've been screaming to intelligent use of gateways for a while now. The first also requires it needing to be a problem that the heroes couldn't possible solve without said Deus Ex. Again, not the case. A Mary Sue is perfect, they don't make mistakes, they don't lose, they are never weak. Egwene is honestly the closest we really get to a Mary Sue and I don't really feel she gets all the way there. The one trick pony with drastically limited powers doesn't qualify.
  25. Suttree, my point was simple. That you can be deeply established in a series, have all your major players already established and going. Have no need to add anymore, and then add new characters. Cadsuane and Androl both represent this idea, albeit at different times. As for your literary points. I'll simply say that there are tropes specifically aimed at the situation we're discussing. I'll also say that Tropes aren't automatically bad. You thought it was a poor decision and that it didn't work. I thought the opposite. You're not going to sway me, I'm not going to sway you. At this point it's agree to disagree, so won't say any more on that.
×
×
  • Create New...