For people with a sex drive from the fourteenth century, I bet that was wild. And the serving girls' ankles? Phew, someone open a window! It's hot in here!

I am torn, to the very fabric of my soul. The Creator's hand shelter me. The Amyrlin Seat just told me to yank the crank. What? I mean, is this the best day of my life or the worst? How am I meant to cope with this? I'm only flesh and blood. And on the other hand, I would always say there is always another notch to crank it up. Always. But that was before Mother told me to yank the crank. I don't think there is a notch after that. The amps are already at eleven. This Novice has nothing left in her his belt pouch. On a completely and utterly unrelated point, does any one have any hand cream? This sudden cold weather has left my hands feeling rather dry....

I am sure there are good romance novels out there, however, Mills and Boon type pulp cannot be compared to WoT. But still the pretext, aim and everything else is different. If someone once directed a Hallmark movie, would that then mean that they should be a standard to compare everything else to? Male gaze is called that as the camera, or the narrator, acts as a man's gaze, lingering on the female body. If it does exist in romance, then its goal is the same, to titillate the audience. Except who gets titillated by descriptions of female anatomy? In a romance the context is completely different, being wrapped up in a fantasy that is appealing to a female audience, or they would not be reading. I was reading an article recently about a pair of women that had carved out a niche for themselves in dinosaur erotica. That is not a joke. So make really good money writing full-time about large-breasted women being ravished by dinosaurs. Their words. And this is aimed at women. Does this mean that if I write a serious attempt at high fantasy, I can include lots of large-breasted women being assaulted by triceratops because that is what women like, and how could it be seen as sexist because an actual woman with lady bits and everything also wrote about it? WoT is not a romance so cannot be judged as one, or taken in the same context. I really don't see how this should be a difficult concept to understand.

I think that is taking it slightly out of context. Romance is tying into eroticism and fantasy, while also trying to stay on the good side of societal norms so it is not seen as obscene. So that on one had gives us the female (sure not only female but still) fantasy of being whipped off your feet by a tall handsome stranger. Books echo this fantasy because it is thrilling. But juxtapose this to a non-erotic/romantic story, and it does not work. We don't want men to be as expressive as Lan, who shout "quiet woman" and quite literally sexually assault them. It is only fairly recently that romances have gotten over the first sexual encounter being non-consensual, because the woman had to be virginial, and unwilling and only later realise that actually she loved the pirate/bandit/highwayman so that it would not portray her as having loose morals. So in a romance written to titillate, having women being spanked, assaulted and disrespected can be exciting and long descriptive passages about secondary sexual characteristics are demanded, the Wheel of Time is something different, plays by different rules, and cannot be judged in the same way. Jordan's male gaze in the novels is definitely sexist, and there are lots of themes that can also be debated about how sexist they are. Likening the Wheel of Time to trashy, semi-erotic works with no value as literature does not do anything but demean Jordan's writing, and, no, it makes no difference if the bodice ripper was written by a woman. Why would it?

Well, completely re-written is perhaps a bit overkill. Majorly re-written would perhaps be more appropriate. I'd imagine Moiraine and Lan would have progressed similarly, but there would have been time for Lan and Rand on the tower top (cause lets face it, we have not seen them naked enough yet), There could have been scenes with Moiraine and Rand (who would not be pretending to be dead) as she pretends not to care what he is doing. There could have been a sizable chunk of Moiraine/Lan story line playing out quite differently. Which may have meant that current version was stretched over more episodes while also being given more screen time as the two "main" actors need to get their mojo on. Without access to the scripts to be sure, I think Barney leaving will continue to have an effect on the story however subtle for a long time to come. And I don't know about the end of season 1 being mostly the same, there was Fain, the dagger, the horn, all of that screamed for Mat's involvement. Perrin wandering off and then coming back to look at them dumbly does not seem to me like what would have happened if Mat had been there. But who knows? I guess we never will unless the scripts are released one day.

Nothing wrong with my peaches, *sulks* Do you think we have scared @megalomax enough by hijacking his thread, Mother? Or should we crank it up a notch?

And also the whole of season 2 was rewritten - originally the three boys would have been hunting the horn, not just Perrin, which would have automatically granted Ingtar much more screentime (one would assume) as it would have to be divided between fewer competing story lines. Another consequence perhaps of Barney exiting.

I think it possible that "they" (whoever that might be) did not want the series to get the publicity about having a gendered magic source before it was relevant to the story, or perhaps I should say, could not be avoided. So the publicity was about less controversial or potentially politically sensitive issues. Because it is certainly true that there is no reason at all to not have had one of Moiraine's saying about cats and dogs, or fish and birds or whatever, as that would not even require a gendered source, but simply different methods, though obviously still gendered. But still easy to understand. It does come across as a bit clumsy, especially as it then makes up part of the surprising Moiraine is shielded story line.

Yes I understand the analogy, and it does to an extent make sense that understanding how to affect the weather is related to a ter'angreal doing the same thing. But logically, the ter'angreal is not a sa'angreal that is only amplifying the channelers weaves but is in essence a machine that is being operated. And as such it does not really make sense that the ability to weave the weather directly would be exactly the same as using the ter'angreal, and so the Sea Folk's ability to superpower the Bowl of the Winds is not directly related to their ability to affect the weather but instead stems from completely different research into the Bowl in the 1,000 years they had it from the breaking to its loss.

In the books I always found Egwene a little too focused on doing the right thing, almost as if she was the Dragon as she did not really seem to have the struggles with motivation that all the other characters had to one degree or another. Definitely looking forward to seeing how her character pans out.

It is tricky part of me wants to say they'll ignore this and take it more as a strength of will thing, that she told Renna she was going to kill her and she did. No emotional baggage there. But while it does not play into her being torn by remorse, it does give a bit more meaning to the line "you have no idea what I am capable of" to Liandrin. I thought that was a bit weak at the time, as her show of defiance and been thoroughly put down and out-creeped by our favourite woman who does not respect others personal space, but taken with the events in Falme, it could mean that Egwene really is on course to be completely badass and ruthless quite different from her goody-two-shoes image in the books.

The books are quite quiet on the matter, except for the Myrddral, there it quite specifically talks about the Fades being throwbacks to the human stock. Which means there has to be a Daddy trolloc and a mummy trolloc who love each very much. Any kind of asexual reproduction would not create throwbacks. There are also hints in the trolloc tribes, which implies familial connections, though the books never take the idea of the tribes any further. The World of the Wheel of Time does try to fill in some of this information (female trollocs like being pregnant, presumably as opposed to other animals who hate it and try everything to stop becoming pregnant, maybe they even like sex? that would be strange), but it does not explain why none of it is visible in the books, where they live, why everyone lets them breed away (actually that is not true in the first book Lan alludes to fighting with trollocs in the blight is a foregone conclusion, so they are protected in some way while within the blight itself) or how hundreds of thousands of trollocs support themselves. While the books are quiet on it, RJ appears not to have been, quite happily explaining the niceties of the situation, one explanation of which can be found by googling "A letter to Pam Korda".

I have no idea what you are talking about but it sounds interesting, Would love to take part but have zero clue what you are actually looking for. If that is good enough, count me in 🙂 If it is not, I can manage on my own! Me and Bob don't need nobody! Is there something you need from me or would you rather I left you alone?

Congratulations, you have officially thought about this more than Team Jordan/Brandon Sanderson. As a reward you get a recommendation to go lie down in a quiet, dark place to recover.

I guess it is like if an actor is saying, I cannot act this character if you change this. Like Tam's sword being super-important to Rand, or something I could not understand from S1, was how for Mat/Barney the Birgitte doll did not become his most precious belonging, something that would keep his sisters safe but also tie him to them until he could deliver it. That he dropped it on the ground immediately, I don't get, and I could see an actor saying, look I cannot act this character unless you explain how that works, or if he does not have this deep unconditional love for his sisters that overrides everything.

This totally agrees with my own summation, but also backs up my thoughts on why would ability to control the weather actually entail the ability to wring more performance out of a ter'angreal as the two should not be the same. Like a goat that can crop the grass very close to the ground is not per se an individual that can operate a lawn mower really well.

Did you mean Taraboner culture, is Tanchico being moved to Arad Doman, or are these two separate things? Sorry, I bet that is really clear to everyone else, but it is past my bedtime...

I have never heard of the Lone Wolf series, though I loved Fighting Fantasy as a kid, I guess they were similar?

*waves*

Just did a quick search to see if this had been asked before, and yay, are there some interesting threads out there. A letter to Pam Korda... Anyway. back to the point of discussion. Could an Emond Fielder, such as Rand, kill a female trolloc? I am torn on the subject, not least because, ewwwww, but would they see the humanity and helplessness in them and their "all too human eyes"TM or would they be happy to remove the source of the trolloc threat. And why do wolves call Myrddral Neverborn, when they are? Has no one ever taken a wolf aside and explained the birds and the bees and the trollocs? Perhaps it is about time.

This sounds like something that only a thorough referencing of the books is going to sort out, and I don't have an ebook to search. I am pretty sure that there is a lot implied by a possibly unreliable narrator, which allows people to take their own meaning out of the books. I agree with @Jsbrads2, however much the companion books may officially be canon (and very useful) there is still a meaningful distinction between what is actually in the books, and what was in the author's mind. However I do think that people are perhaps making claims about what the books say a little bit freely (I myself can only give what I remember which is not exactly gospel; you'll never make that stand up in court, said the school girl to the judge) so in the absence of the actual quotes perhaps we should agree to disagree, or at least trust our own interpretations?

Welcome to DM, nice to have you around. I moved country, too, and lost a lot of my books, with no real way of transporting them without paying way more than it would probably take to replace them, I told my Dad he could take them to a charity shop. Hopefully someone out there is enjoying them and the charity got something for them. Check out the White Tower, it is quite something. Even if they like throwing Novices in slimy places, and expect you to work your fingers to the bone for them without a word of thanks. But you will meet a lot of fun people there and @Dead Warder.

Yes, she saw an image, or in this case a gif, that meant Mat would stab Rand. She understood it, totally checks out. But for the TV audience, that still has to be explained because that is not what they have "seen" though maybe they are just meant to pick that up along the way. The trouble is though that Min knows how her visions work, went through hell as a kid trying to make the bad ones not happen and knows it cannot be done, yet still seems to think it is only relevant once Ishamael tells her to make Mat go with Rand. And she tells Mat not to go, as if that will help. But she should know that it will not, and not just to be like the books, but because that is how the visions work as far as everything had been explained. She could have see the vision, got drunk, told Mat, and then he could have, not believing her, tried to avert the fate by not going and that would have made much more sense, without the need of potentially re-writing how her visions work so that it makes sense. Little things like that are frustrating where being consistent or true to the books would not have changed the story they want to tell, but just needed a little more attention.

I have called you an anitfeminist because you act like one. However, this is not an ad hominem attack, I am not arguing that your thoughts on the show are without merit because of this. What I am saying is that your personal attacks on the showrunner, and your ad hominem attacks on the show (that the changes are bad because of who the showrunner is and not on their own merits) shows your own political stance and has nothing to do with the show at all. Modern liberal feminism is no different than any other feminism. It has the same goals and ideals. And it has the same opponents. It is not completely correct, nor is completely wrong. All feminism is about making the genders equal. Any specific thought, idea or concept would need to be looked at on its own merits, labelling it "modern liberal feminism" would not make it correct or incorrect, yet this is what you are doing. You are blanket labelling everything "feminism" and therefore wrong and should be resisted. This is what antifeminists have done since the beginning of feminism, and your meaningless adjective of "modern liberal" does not change the argument. It is still a defence of the status quo: no changes can be made to anything. That is not an agenda. Would updating the technology or weaponry used in the books be an agenda? Feminism is not some weird and out-there theory, feminism is about how we are all equal. There is not really a counter point to it. This is an agenda? Feminism is not one body of thought, nor is everything that is called feminism correct or right. Therefore even if a change is motivated by some ideal of feminism, this means nothing as the change would still have to be looked at with its own merits to say whether it is a good one or not.

It is difficult to explain. They stuff I read characterises both tastes as acidic, which is where the confusion comes from I would say. Vinegar does not taste the same as pure cocoa, for example, to me, but there is a similarity in the acrid acidity, that feeling that makes you narrow your eyes and your tongue to twist and whatever other strange facial movements. It is an interesting thought that some people (possibly including me) cannot fully taste bitterness, as given it is a basic taste then it should be distinct as salty, sweet, spicy or sour. At least it is the most unpleasant taste, so surely cannot be that much of a loss.