Should I read Robert Jordan's books?

[giant snake]

The odds are in favor mainly because A) I enjoyed another book I read by the author, and B) his fans have a lot of good things to say about him. I'm not opposed to reading fantasy by any means, but I realize that a lot of it is just a cash in using fantastical elements for the sake of it. If the author can take a character I already like and not only not screw it up but make a great self contained story, I'm thinking that he could do something good with free reign over the story and characters as well. Plus he was a door gunner on a Huey in Vietnam, suggesting he had a lot of life experience before starting to write books.

The common criticisms for Dune are: the story plays with your expectations and that the characters become something you didn't want. I don't think that's the right answer at all, especially because you already know that they are going to be more significant than ordinary people.

With ASoIaF, people say that the story drags on and that the story is nihilistic. I think the latter is not true at all, and the former is only because the last two books had such a gap in between them. Also, Mereen.

LotR isn't bad, I think, it's just that it has some of the strangest fans, and that all of the poetic imagery and allegory I need should come from the actual story. I shouldn't need some sort of encyclopedia or a college course to appreciate the depth of the story, because it is fiction, after all.

I haven't heard anything bad about Robert Jordan except that the story is too long. Or rather, that's the main criticism.

[tzanth]

1) Are those accusations true?

2) In your opinion, how does it compare to Ice and Fire, quality wise?

3) What kind of fantasy book is it? Is it realistic and reminiscent of some period in history? Which series I know is it most like?

1) Yes they are, but that doesn't mean you won't enjoy the books, especially if you can read them all at once.*

2) There is no comparison. Very different series.

3) I think its probably best thought of as a soap opera in a fantasy setting. Much of the plot focuses on the fairly predictable foibles and shenanigans of the large cast of characters.

* I think the worst thing about WoT was waiting for years to get a new book and then finding that 80% of it was crap. Then having this repeat several times over. If you could read them all together and skip over the most ridiculously boring parts then it might actually be a lot better.

[Errant Bard]

B) his fans have a lot of good things to say about him. I'm not opposed to reading fantasy by any means, but I realize that a lot of it is just a cash in using fantastical elements for the sake of it.

You are actually utterly wrong here, though of course there has been a memorable flamewar in Lit with a thread untitled "Is Jordan a sellout".

Said another way, if you were to split up fantasy in "cash in" and "non-cash in" categories, the "cash in" would be the minority, yet both ASOIAF and WoT would likely be put in it.

[kingofashes]

I actually think we've been spoiled since the early to mid 90's with the quality of fantasy.

When I read WOT it was a bit of a shock and a surprise for me as I hadn't read anything like it before. I compare it to the first time I heard Nirvana as a 14 year old. It was like having a thirst quenched when I wasn't even aware I was dehydrated. It was like getting a meal after being starved but not realizing til after the meal just how hungry I was.

Anyway it's hard to explain to someone else what you got from a set of books, even if there is faults in those books. Is someone else going to have the same reaction to me though if they've read all the great fantasy series then try WOT... it's obviously not going to be as amazing as I thought it was when I first read it.

It was a long time ago so it's easy for me to forget just how much I loved these books.

[Reposado]

And there's a bunch of people saying Yes to, so I guess, like before he asked the question, it's up to the OP to decide if it's worth giving a shot. Opinions are mixed.

well iirc, there werent a lot of flat yes answers. there were a lot of "try it for yourselfs"

kinda past the point though. sure opinions are mixed but the fact that hes basically asking to be convinced to read it kinda means he probably shoudnt.

there enough things out that

a. opinions arent so mixed on.

b. the op will know he wants to read without having a bunch of people convince him to give it a shot.

[WrathOfTinyKittens]

Obviously WOT is polarizing. But the argument that Eragon or Twilight are also popular, therefore WOT's popularity doesnt mean anything, is kind of missing a point. Popularity isn't everything, but it's also sure as hell not nothing. ASOIAF is super popular too, yet is of excellent quality. Even Twilight and Eragon had something that appealed to a large audience.

[Shryke]

well iirc, there werent a lot of flat yes answers. there were a lot of "try it for yourselfs"

That's your perception. A ton of people going "try it for yourself" were WOT fans. They are just alot less forceful about it then the detractors. Mostly because they have a less extreme view of the series. Everyone saying "try it" was like "It's got good points, but also some negatives".

kinda past the point though. sure opinions are mixed but the fact that hes basically asking to be convinced to read it kinda means he probably shoudnt.

That doesn't make any sense. He's not asking to be convinced he's asking for opinions from people who have read it. You know, the whole reason people read reviews.

But hey, yeah, anyone who needs to read a review for a book obviously shouldn't read the book, am I right?

[Bronson]

In terms of world building , it's an impressive achievement .

[giant snake]

I'll ask you this: Would anyone copy his style of world? Robert E Howard didn't live long enough, but his creativity pretty much came to inspire anyone writing a style of fantasy that didn't have tolkien-esque ground rules.

[Darth Richard]

What?

[Captain Sheepf*cker]

Huh?

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Yes. If I had to suffer through it, you should too. You'll at least have an informed opinion on what is likely going to be one of the more hotly debated questions in fantasy literature for at least another decade.

There's always the small possibility that you might enjoy it, so either way, have at it.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

Hear me out please

I'm not asking because I'm a lazy reader, but I have so many books that I have planned to read and I usually put multi-volume series at the back of the list. In fact I only picked up ASoIaF on a whim and I was really lucky that it is as good as it is. Other than that, I've read the Dune series (by the original author) and the Conan stories by RE Howard and Sprague de Camp. That pretty much does it for fantasy. I did read Lord of the Rings a long time ago, but I didn't really like it that much and don't have an interest in reading more of Tolkien.

I did read one of Robert Jordan's Conan books and I actually thought it was really good. That combined with ASoIaF always being compared to Robert Jordan is kind of making me want to read it. The thing is, I've heard a lot of negative hype around the books; they go on too long, they lack focus, and that they don't end properly.

1) Are those accusations true?

2) In your opinion, how does it compare to Ice and Fire, quality wise?

3) What kind of fantasy book is it? Is it realistic and reminiscent of some period in history? Which series I know is it most like?

You've read Dune? Well Jordon is pretty similar in that he rips off the Fremen and Bene Gesserit and calls them "Aiel" and "Aes Sedai" and the story of the Wheel of Time centers around a male who is prophesied to be able to do what the female magic users can already do, so yeah, a male Aes Sedai/Bene Gesserit. Don't get me wrong, Jordon doesn't completely rip off Dune, he also takes some time to loot the remains of the Lord of the Rings as well.

[giant snake]

haha, well Dune certainly borrowed heavily from history and epic tradition as well.

The problem with most fantasy is that it is so derivative. I don't know if Tolkien just found the right mix of old world mythology and traditions or what - I mean the various races inhabiting inhospitable lands, the 'sleeping king,' etc. For me, at least, the best part about those books were the poetic names given to places, swords, and characters. Dune I liked just for its ballsiness in telling a story that centered so much of explored space around one planet, a lineage, and a few organizations.

[Errant Bard]

The problem with most fantasy is that it is so derivative.

How exactly are you able to make such a statement when you're read only three Fantasy series, and pretty seminal ones at that?

[WrathOfTinyKittens]

Yeah, EB I thought about that too. And WOT is one of the series that gets, or got, constantly cribbed. So I think it's a good read for anyone who wants to get into the genre.

[peterbound]

So I went to my son's book fair the other day, and saw, whaddyaknow, the RJ EOTW graphic novel for sale at the thing. I figured, 'what the hell, i'll get this. Dylan is 11, he might like it.' So I got it for my son. He handed it back to me in about an hour and stated, 'The writing in this is horrible, did you actually read this?'. I had to admit that yes, I did indeed read that thing when I was younger, and yes, the dialog, and the plot for that matter, was very poorly written.

I had to explain to him though, that at the time, the SF/F realm was a barren wasteland of D&D novels, and Tie-ins, that i fucking hated. And that RJ opened the door for much, much better authors. But that yes, the book/graphic novel has not aged well, and that the writing is poor at best. I also went on to explain the lengthy waits for the books, the diminishing quality, and the lack of resolution. He looked at me like I was a fool for actually sticking it out, much less starting it, and walked away with a chuckle.

I've read all the books. And I've read a shit ton of other fantasy books. I finished the books because I'd started them so many years ago, and they actually meant something to me (much like fucking Fiest, who is finally ending that shit), but I'd only recommend someone start them if they are very young, or didn't have access to better books. They are very YA in terms of today's fantasy genre, and not all that great.

[Errant Bard]

Yeah, EB I thought about that too. And WOT is one of the series that gets, or got, constantly cribbed. So I think it's a good read for anyone who wants to get into the genre.

It is very important in the history of genre itself, and it should be read at one point, but I think nowadays a newcomer to the genre, for the same time invested, can sample many more universes, and better ones at that, giving him a more comprehensive view of the genre, that would maybe prevent him from making blanket statements about all fantasy being derivative (though of course there is an argument that any work of literature is derivative,) also maximising enjoyment by having variety in his reading. If he decides to go for the good, short series instead of this leviathan that was revolutionary in its time, but is nothing much now.

Aside from that... constantly cribbed? By who? LOTR got cribbed by Jordan, so was Dune, so were the Arthurian legends, the Norse myths, and a lot of other things, it's even a plot point somehow, I can see a lot of books having the same inspiration (like, say, Shannara), but a series cribbing WoT? Hah!

[peterbound]

Aside from that... constantly cribbed? By who? LOTR got cribbed by Jordan, so was Dune, so were the Arthurian legends, the Norse myths, and a lot of other things, it's even a plot point somehow, I can see a lot of books having the same inspiration (like, say, Shannara), but a series cribbing WoT? Hah!

Ya. I can't think of a single book from a major author, or best selling series that has used Jordan as 'inspiration'.

[Bronson]

It is very important in the history of genre itself, and it should be read at one point, but I think nowadays a newcomer to the genre, for the same time invested, can sample many more universes, and better ones at that, giving him a more comprehensive view of the genre, that would maybe prevent him from making blanket statements about all fantasy being derivative (though of course there is an argument that any work of literature is derivative,) also maximising enjoyment by having variety in his reading. If he decides to go for the good, short series instead of this leviathan that was revolutionary in its time, but is nothing much now.

Aside from that... constantly cribbed? By who? LOTR got cribbed by Jordan, so was Dune, so were the Arthurian legends, the Norse myths, and a lot of other things, it's even a plot point somehow, I can see a lot of books having the same inspiration (like, say, Shannara), but a series cribbing WoT? Hah!

The were a ton of writers writing fantasy long before Tolkien. The genre of fantasy is as old as literature.