But not with any freedom. Imagine the horror if she retained immortality wearing that yoke.

Ishamael cannot be a reference to Samael. That job is already taken - by Sammael. Ishamael is almost certainly a reference to Ishmael - someone who was promised to rule over men, with twelve sons chosen to be princes under him. The name he went by in the Trolloc Wars - Ba'alzamon - is a combination of Ba'al and Beelzebub. It's true that many of the names of the Forsaken appear to be direct references to characters from the Abrahamic religions, and others from pagan mythology, but some of those references are for their given names and some are for their assumed names as Forsaken. For example, it appears that Lilith is referenced in Moghedien's original name - Lillen Moiral.

Early on, I thought Jordan had made a mistake in The Great Hunt when he had Verin say flat out that Moiraine had sent her to join Rand and the hunters. Then shortly after, had Moiraine deny she had done anything of the kind, and wonder why Verin went. Turns out. it wasn't a mistake. It was just foreshadowing ten books ahead of time.

I always interpreted that as his reaction to sensing the coins Moiraine had given the boys. He recognized what that meant, and wanted nothing to do with an Aes Sedai.

Taim, not Tam. Demandred, not Damodred. And many readers (including myself) thought Mazrim Taim would turn out to be the disguise Demandred was using - until Jordan changed his mind near the end of the books. This potential plot point is referred to as "Taimandred."

I always wish someone good luck when starting back on this adventure. Happy reading.

I wish you well on your adventure. I was one of those who started reading at the very beginning, and re-read it every time I bought new books. So I never had the opportunity to experience the entire thing fresh without pause. It's interesting to think about how that would have changed things.

Actually, she mentioned a different specific viewing she had (without giving details) that referred directly to Moiraine and success or failure in the Last Battle. It was different from the sparks that she saw not as a single event, but as a visualization of a continuing struggle. "He would almost certainly fail without a woman who was dead and gone..." is how she puts it one of the times she talks about it. It's different from the times (like with Egwene and Gawyn) where she sees two courses of action leading to two different results. In this one, the viewing itself implies uncertainty.

And Min's only "if" viewing was about this. For every other viewing (that she understood) what she saw happened no matter what anyone did to try and prevent it. Only that one could go either way.

That's one of my favorites.

Actually, his first job after leaving was Executive Producer on a short horror film released in 2022. He may have left because he wanted to get behind the camera, rather than just act.

Prior to Taim's "resonance," they WEREN'T identified and recruited. Rand didn't know how to test potential male channelers. He invited people to join him, but unless they had already started to channel on their own, they were just "twiddling their thumbs." Also, Jordan's Aes Sedai were simply human. Even a group that had explicit knowledge that the Last Battle would eventually come would have a hard time maintaining focus if they didn't know WHEN it would come. So even the least selfish or power-hungry of them spent their time following the goals of their respective Ajahs and trying to guide the world as best they could, while arguing with each other about how to go about that. And they HOPED everything would gel in time to marshal the forces of the Light to fight that battle. All Aes Sedai knew the Dragon would be reborn, but only a tiny few even believed he had to have free rein to lead. Most thought he would need to be leashed to serve the Tower's purposes - or even eliminated. Even the rebels in Salidar weren't all on board with letting him act independently. If they couldn't even get that right, why would you expect them to do everything else correctly? Remember, the Prophecies didn't tell them what they would need to do, or when they would need to do it. And 3000 years is a loooong time to keep an organization primed to do something with that little information. For a very long time, the White Tower has been mostly guessing. Also, bear in mind that the Aes Sedai largely had no idea about the Wise Ones or the Windfinders. They didn't have a clue just how many channelers there were outside the Tower, so they had no reason to believe that there would be anything to gain in looking for new recruits outside of those who made their own way to Tar Valon. Should they have known better? Possibly. But they were only human. And it's hard for a human to change their ways when they think they're the smartest person around.

So, a part of it is showing the assembled nobles that one of the world's "great captains" backs Egwene and her claim to the Amyrlin Seat. And that she intended to act on that claim without stepping foot on Andoran soil. Pelivar and Bryne were both needed to get those nobles to assemble where they did. The bigger part was to manipulate the Hall to make a formal declaration of war - putting Egwene firmly and legally in command of the Salidar Aes Sedai. Without them seeing it coming or recognizing the manipulation. A much smaller part (so far as any of them knew at the time) was to start recruiting new Novices, building up the rebel side in sheer numbers beyond anything the Tower could imagine.

True, but well deserved. By any objective measure I can think of, the idea that ANY knowledgeable person within the world of the story would think the Dragon could be a woman fundamentally changes the source material. The idea that Rand could knowingly have a romantic relationship with one of the Forsaken fundamentally changes the source material. The idea that it required channeling to enter the Ways fundamentally changes the source material. And so on.

I didn't twist your words, I quoted them. And the words I quoted clearly stated that whether the show deviated from the source material or not was a matter of subjective opinion, rather than something objectively identifiable. Your clarification didn't address the part I quoted. It simply conceded that people have different opinions on whether this was successful or not. Too many times I have seen legitimate, honest criticism of the show fundamentally changing the source material being dismissed as simply opinion - not about whether the changes work, but about whether they even exist. It's belittling and dishonest, and it poisons any reasonable discussion.