WOT questions, advice needed and given.

[TheRevanchist]

TheRevanchist,

LOTR is certainly not a recent publication. It was published in 1954. Are you holding it to the same standards as a work published 40 (and more) years later?

No. As I said, compared to fantasy books before it, Wheel of Time is far better in that aspect, cause actually it has homosexual relations that.

Even compared with todays standards (Martin, Abercrombie, Rothfuss, Sanderson, Ryan, Lawrence etc) it still stands very well. It has as much - if not more - homosexual/bisexual relations than the books of those authors.

[Lyanna Stark]

Sorry, allow me to reflect.

My general point is that you have demonstrated quite adequately there are gendered attitudes and gendered assumptions about both the male and female relationship to magic.

My point was that I don't think these impact the larger relationship of the characters to their surroundings or characters.

Just magic.

But you disagree and I know that.

You have yet to explain *why* you don't think this has any material impact. After all, the main imperative with regards to magic is that biology = destiny so I can't see how you can, with a straight face or any claim to logic, argue that his has no material impact on the characters or on the narrative.

I have given examples of when, within narrative, this ties to a larger structure of gender essentialism and traditional sexist structures.

[Corvinus85]

Actually, that is sexist. Ascribing innate attributes or capabilities based on gender is, per its definition, sexist. For instance, ascribing "more mature" to women based on their gender is sexist. It may be what is known as benevolent sexism, but it's sexism all the same.

Yes, I acknowledged that it was sexist. But I believe that this interpretation fits better with how women and men are depicted throughout the books. The female characters see themselves as more mature than the male characters. So to repeat what I said, (because you wrote extensively since :D ) the way characters access the One Power fits with how people are depicted in WoT. Women are not submissive, they understand that sometimes surrender is the right option, men are stubborn fools, and they need to fight it out in order to reach their goal.

There is actually an in world explanation for this - covered under the Wheel of Time companion book.

Mordeth counselled the King of Aridhol and the city slowly became more and more zealous in it's fight against the Shadow. Eventually using the tactics of the Shadow, thus abondoning the light, Mashadar (the killing fog) destroyed the village and only the evil spirit of Mordeth remained

Are you referring to the World of the WoT or the upcoming massive companion book?

Anyway, what you wrote in the spoiler is from the series itself, and it does not explain why Mordeth exists in the first place. Not to mention that by the end of the series, this evil has yet another name. And like I said, Aginor recognized it, but Aginor was imprisoned for a thousand years or more when Mordeth came to Aridhol. So this leads me to believe that Mordeth's evil is something, that much the rebirth of things with the turning of the Wheel, has come and gone many times.

[TheRevanchist]

Yes, I acknowledged that it was sexist. But I believe that this interpretation fits better with how women and men are depicted throughout the books. The female characters see themselves as more mature than the male characters. So to repeat what I said, (because you wrote extensively since :D ) the way characters access the One Power fits with how people are depicted in WoT. Women are not submissive, they understand that sometimes surrender is the right option, men are stubborn fools, and they need to fight it out in order to reach their goal.

Are you referring to the World of the WoT or the upcoming massive companion book?

Anyway, what you wrote in the spoiler is from the series itself, and it does not explain why Mordeth exists in the first place. Not to mention that by the end of the series, this evil has yet another name. And like I said, Aginor recognized it, but Aginor was imprisoned for a thousand years or more when Mordeth came to Aridhol. So this leads me to believe that Mordeth's evil is something, that much the rebirth of things with the turning of the Wheel, has come and gone many times.

To me it looked always that Mordeth was a backup plan for Wheel to balance itself. Like:

- if Dragon kills Shai'tan, then Mordeth takes the Shai'tan place as the evil part of the world (although Shai'tan is quite more complicated) cause the world without darkness cannot exist.

- if Dragon joins Shai'tan then Demandred (at least in that age) takes the Dragon role (because of his hate for Lews Therin) and gives a chance to the world to not be annihilated by the darkness, cause a dark world cannot exist.

It plays well in the philosophy of two parts complementing each other and not able to exist without each other, a recurring theme that can be seen in all aspects of the series.

[Zizoz]

Just to clarify above - the reborn channeler mentioned above is Osangar not Cyndane (I was getting confused) Osangar is suspected to be Aginor.

Aran'gar, not Osan'gar, surely? And I think Aran'gar is Balthamel.

Also,

Callandor / Lightbringer (Assuming it's a sword)

This would work better if you said "assuming it's not a sword". :P

[SilentRoamer]

Thanks for the considered reply Lyanna - think I am probably a little blind to the gender issues as it is not something I ever considered - in fact before this discussion I would have probably assumed most people thought WoT was a fair world where women had a significant amount of agency. As a married man with two daughters (seriously I am outnumbered at home!) I should probably be more sensitive to gender issues.

I suppose I disagree that gender essentialism is bad - my eldest daughter is into princesses and faeries etc. while my youngest is a lot more rough and tumble. I suppose I have always accepted they are different and that my eldest may "fit in" easier but that's not to say I would discourage my youngest from taking any life paths she chose.

I can see the point in how forcing expectations might be a bad thing but I don't see how we could ever change that? Behaviour expectation seems so ingrained into our psyche.

Corvinus - It is from the World of Wheel of Time by Robert Jordan and Teresa Paterson. RJ has stated (I think this is unconfirmed during a signing) that Mashadar appeared after everyone in Aridhol had killed each other due to their suspicions and increasing paranoia. It seems that once a place is corrupted enough by the Shadow it can take an evil form of its own - another example of this would be the corruption of the ways leading to Machin Shin - which is another independent evil.

[SilentRoamer]

Zizoz,

Yes you are right: Arangar is/was Balthamel born back into a woman's body but still able to channel Saidin. Osangar was Agino but was still in a male body.I think the reason we determine which is which is that Osangar reflects on his development of the Trolloc/Fade experiments.

Phew! Finally got it right!

[Corvinus85]

To me it looked always that Mordeth was a backup plan for Wheel to balance itself. Like:

- if Dragon kills Shai'tan, then Mordeth takes the Shai'tan place as the evil part of the world (although Shai'tan is quite more complicated) cause the world without darkness cannot exist.

- if Dragon joins Shai'tan then Demandred (at least in that age) takes the Dragon role (because of his hate for Lews Therin) and gives a chance to the world to not be annihilated by the darkness, cause a dark world cannot exist.

It plays well in the philosophy of two parts complementing each other and not able to exist without each other, a recurring theme that can be seen in all aspects of the series.

I think that was a popular theory before the last book was released.

Corvinus - It is from the World of Wheel of Time by Robert Jordan and Teresa Paterson. RJ has stated (I think this is unconfirmed during a signing) that Mashadar appeared after everyone in Aridhol had killed each other due to their suspicions and increasing paranoia. It seems that once a place is corrupted enough by the Shadow it can take an evil form of its own - another example of this would be the corruption of the ways leading to Machin Shin - which is another independent evil.

Ok, that explanation helps. So it is basically human evil with just an initial push from the DO, and that's why Aginor called it both enemy and ally.

But

The new name it took in the last book was still sudden. Any explanation on that?

[C.T. Phipps]

You have yet to explain *why* you don't think this has any material impact. After all, the main imperative with regards to magic is that biology = destiny so I can't see how you can, with a straight face or any claim to logic, argue that his has no material impact on the characters or on the narrative.

I have given examples of when, within narrative, this ties to a larger structure of gender essentialism and traditional sexist structures.

Alright, I'll try and do so in a manner because I think we're talking at cross points. You've successfully established, not that I ever disagreed with, that magic is gendered in the Wheel of Time-verse. In material terms, it certainly has an impact on men and women because women can be Channelers without going insane while men go insane invariably before having to be put down (by gentling). It also did lead to the very sexist Red Ajah, which seems to exist for no other purpose than being snarling man-hating Bad Aes Sedai and as a cover for the assumption by readers they would turn out to be where all of the Black Ajah were hiding (when in fact, they were hiding everywhere).

The Red Ajah is absolutely sexist and eye-rolling. One of my least favorite elements of the setting. Especially the handling of Elaida.

My issue regarding channeling is that Channeling is, fundamentally, like a holding a hammer. It is a tool, indeed a fictional tool, which has importance in the context of the narrative but doesn't actually impact the characters beyond the fact they use it (and Rand's insanity). We have women warriors, women scholars, women teachers, women healers, and women political masterminds.

When men could channel safely, we have men warriors, men investment bankers, men bards, men scholars, and men so on. In short, despite the fact magic is gendered and done in two diametrically opposite ways, it does the exact same thing. Furthermore, the characters are not impacted by this particular road. You have claimed Nynaeve needs to become submissive to master her magic when, in fact, I'd argue she becomes submissive only to the magic itself rather than as a person. No other characetr is impacted by their magic other than its use as a tool and a skill to be mastered.

In short, the gender and ways the magic is accessed may have the trappings of sexuality but they aren't really more than dross or trappings. Jordan could have easily made Rand able to channel and insane because he's a Ginger or, problematically, his race. Much is made of the gendered element of magic in the setting.

HOWEVER, I can't help but think this is a distraction from much larger issues of culture, character, the voice of female characters, interactions between the sexes, and themes in the narrative that are much-much more directly relevant in terms of literary criticism. We have gender roles and glass ceilings and sexism and chauvenism in the real world.

We don't have people conjuring wind or healing with their minds if they're girls and guys gibbering about the Invisible Wind Monster in his head while shooting lightning.

[C.T. Phipps]

Wow. Cool. Not everyday you meet professional artists on a forum discussing said art (As in, writer's on a book forum, musicians on a music forum etc). Good luck with future projects. I'm only in the planning stages of my series, and it might well stay there for ever as I tend to like planning the books more than the writing them. :D

Thanks, much appreciated. It's a long-long road with much-much practice and criticism and revisioning required but worth it in the end.

[Lyanna Stark]

Thanks for the considered reply Lyanna - think I am probably a little blind to the gender issues as it is not something I ever considered - in fact before this discussion I would have probably assumed most people thought WoT was a fair world where women had a significant amount of agency. As a married man with two daughters (seriously I am outnumbered at home!) I should probably be more sensitive to gender issues.

I suppose I disagree that gender essentialism is bad - my eldest daughter is into princesses and faeries etc. while my youngest is a lot more rough and tumble. I suppose I have always accepted they are different and that my eldest may "fit in" easier but that's not to say I would discourage my youngest from taking any life paths she chose.

I can see the point in how forcing expectations might be a bad thing but I don't see how we could ever change that? Behaviour expectation seems so ingrained into our psyche.

I think perhaps you are conflating gender essentialism with femininity, or expressions of femininity. The distinction can be difficult to discern without digging somewhat deeper into the topic. I meant for a while to post something more comprehensive on it in the Feminsm thread, but if you are interested in the specifics, then Julia Serano's Whipping Girl is the best and clearest book I have found on the topic of modern feminism and the scapegoating of femininity. In short, it removes femininity or expressions thereof from biology and biological determination, showing that these are separate, but also that femininity is in itself both traditionally devalued and a valid expression of self. Simply put: a lot of feminist effort has gone into proving that women can take their place in a man's world and compete with men on men's terms, while forgetting that for true equality to work, you cannot forget all of those people, both women and men, who do not fit in a traditional "man's world". And they are many.

The thing with WoT is that the world has been created so women do have agency, this is how it is set up. Women have power, wield power and are, on paper, doing very, very well. Which is, I guess, why it is perhaps perplexingly more disappointing that it undermines its own narrative since it's clear there is an ambition to do something else, yet as Galactus states: it ends up being a failed feminist series.

[Sparrow spoiler]

I would love to have input on what you guys are discussing. :dunno: but im lost

[C.T. Phipps]

I think perhaps you are conflating gender essentialism with femininity, or expressions of femininity. The distinction can be difficult to discern without digging somewhat deeper into the topic. I meant for a while to post something more comprehensive on it in the Feminsm thread, but if you are interested in the specifics, then Julia Serano's Whipping Girl is the best and clearest book I have found on the topic of modern feminism and the scapegoating of femininity. In short, it removes femininity or expressions thereof from biology and biological determination, showing that these are separate, but also that femininity is in itself both traditionally devalued and a valid expression of self. Simply put: a lot of feminist effort has gone into proving that women can take their place in a man's world and compete with men on men's terms, while forgetting that for true equality to work, you cannot forget all of those people, both women and men, who do not fit in a traditional "man's world". And they are many.

The thing with WoT is that the world has been created so women do have agency, this is how it is set up. Women have power, wield power and are, on paper, doing very, very well. Which is, I guess, why it is perhaps perplexingly more disappointing that it undermines its own narrative since it's clear there is an ambition to do something else, yet as Galactus states: it ends up being a failed feminist series.

Don't take this the wrong way but I think this is missing a rather very big forest for a number of conspicuous ugly trees. The forest being that one of the MAJOR THEMES of the Wheel of Time series is exploration and differing cultural values. One of the things which you commented on was the extreme modesty which Nynaeve, Egwene, and Rand all show regarding matters of sex as well as nudity. Which is very true, however, we also encounter many cultures (Aiel and Seafolk) which have VERY different attitudes regarding this. One of the big things which many just take as cribbing from Tolkien with starting our protagonists in Two Rivers is that our characters are forced to interact with people who have extremely different attitudes about sex, violence, nudity, loyalty, fidelity, marriage, gender roles, and society.

None of the cultures in the Wheel of Time is presented as ideal but all of them are shown in varying lights with a major part of the narrative devoted to the characters coming to understand them.

You miss a lot of the book's better feminist qualities in that Egwene, Nynaeve, Elayne, Min, Moiraine, and Aviendha is they have almost NOTHING in common. Their cultures impact them but they learn from one antoher and how to either change their home cultures or break from them completely.

There's no feminist ideal culture but different cultures with different roles for women and varying levels of freedom. Ironically, Jordan explores misogyny and patriarchy on the sly by using the metaphorical slavery of women by the Seanchan for the status of being Channelers rather than their status as being women.

And it's portrayed as monstrous.

[TheRevanchist]

I think that was a popular theory before the last book was released.

Ok, that explanation helps. So it is basically human evil with just an initial push from the DO, and that's why Aginor called it both enemy and ally.

But

The new name it took in the last book was still sudden. Any explanation on that?

It was a popular theory but not before the last book was released IMO. We didn't see Demandred relations with the Shaarans until on the last book (and one of Sanderson's short stories) and we definitely didn't knew the nature of the Dark One until Rand finally met him.

[C.T. Phipps]

I would love to have input on what you guys are discussing. :dunno: but im lost

To get back to the OP.

I think the Wheel of Time is worth reading but it's a huge time commitment and it's not really something which really blows a person away in terms of plot twists or deep characterization.

It's pleasant PG-rated fantasy.

It's a cut above generic PG-rated fantasy, though, by leaps and bounds in terms of world-building and writing.

Still, I, honestly, prefer the Kingkiller Chronicle for my non-R-rated fantasy fun.

For R-rated fantasy, I go to Westeros and Scott Lynch's work.

[SilentRoamer]

Lyanna,

Ah ok thankyou. I don't think I agree but that does make more sense. I think I will probably do a little more reading around the subject before I dip my toe back into this particular pool!

Corvinus,

I always assumed the name change was the last change in Fains original psyche. Remember at the time just before the Last Battle, Fain had decided to kill Rand, he had realised the new powers of raising Trolloc and Myraadral and spreading Mashadar. IIRC he also thinks on how Padan Fain (a part of him) is his only weakness. I think Mashadar and Aridhol were a way of RJ to show that the ends don't always justify the means. Padan had already been changing his name, I assumed Ordeith was an influence from Mordeth but eventually Fain became his own evil - even Machin Shin fled from him.

[SilentRoamer]

Site likes me so much today its doubling up all my posts!

[Corvinus85]

It was a popular theory but not before the last book was released IMO. We didn't see Demandred relations with the Shaarans until on the last book (and one of Sanderson's short stories) and we definitely didn't knew the nature of the Dark One until Rand finally met him.

The Mordeth part was. I remember from the time I spent at dragonmount.

[Corvinus85]

I would love to have input on what you guys are discussing. :dunno: but im lost

Hey, I'm barely keeping up, myself. And I hope that we didn't spoil too much in case you do decide to read it.

There are plenty of other themes in this gigantic series. Rich, diverse world, a lot of conflict. While in ASoIaF, the seemingly big conflict with the Others has always been in the background, here you know from the start that it's about good vs evil like in most other stories, but being such a big story, it often diverges into more game of thornes-like conflicts.

And though its prose makes it more PG than ASoIaF, if this were ever to become TV show, it would not be PG. Plenty of nudity and gory stuff, just not described in detail. One theme that I like deals with people called Darkfriends - the idea that anyone, anywhere can be evil, and you have to be on your toes.

[Lyanna Stark]

Alright, I'll try and do so in a manner because I think we're talking at cross points. You've successfully established, not that I ever disagreed with, that magic is gendered in the Wheel of Time-verse. In material terms, it certainly has an impact on men and women because women can be Channelers without going insane while men go insane invariably before having to be put down (by gentling). It also did lead to the very sexist Red Ajah, which seems to exist for no other purpose than being snarling man-hating Bad Aes Sedai and as a cover for the assumption by readers they would turn out to be where all of the Black Ajah were hiding (when in fact, they were hiding everywhere).

I don't think we are talking at cross points at all. Since the One Power is divided into one Male and one Female half, it stands to reason anyone reading the series at all will figure out the magic is tied to sex. (In this context, since it is biologically determined, sex would be the more correct term more so than gender, which implies a host of other things.) More importantly, which is my main argument: the magic system is inherently sexist. Which is what you so far seem to disagree with, albeit without having being able to bring anything useful to the table to show that the system is inherently not sexist.

This time you tried "but Saidin is corrupted" which has nothing at all to do with how the male and female powers are described and characterised. This means, as Lord Varys put previously, the metaphysical terms on which you interact with your magic, in narrative. Let's try again, from the beginning, verbatim, quoted from the WoT wiki:

Saidar: Saidar is described as gentle, but infinitely powerful; a force which will do what you wish it to, but requires patience and submission to properly channel it. Surrender is necessary to gain it, and women universally speak of it as "embracing" the Power. Weaving for a female channeller is described as "guiding" the Power to perform the desired task.

Saidin: Saidin is described as a rough torrent that resists any attempts to control it. To employ it requires strict control, forcing it to do what you want. Male channellers universally refer to gaining the Power as "seizing" it and weaving saidin as "wielding" it like a weapon.

Further, my google-fu tells me (I have a vague memory of this) that the controls for Saidin are called "The Flame" and "The Void" while the control mechanism taught female channellers is called "The Rosebud".

To re-iterate and come back to the point I was originally arguing: this is a sexist magic system, based on gender essentialist assumptions that men grasp, wield and wrestle their part of the power, while women then submit to the gentle flow. This is also beside the point that in order to even reach this point of extreme gender essentialism, we must assume that sex always = gender which always end up being either a binary male or a binary female, without taking into account that gender in itself has a built in sliding scale. Setting "Male" and "Female" up as opposites is a false dichotomy which only serves creating sexism.

In short, the gender and ways the magic is accessed may have the trappings of sexuality but they aren't really more than dross or trappings. Jordan could have easily made Rand able to channel and insane because he's a Ginger or, problematically, his race. Much is made of the gendered element of magic in the setting.

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of what is meant with "magic system" and the rules governing it. It has nothing to do with who gets to channel, or who goes mad when, and everything with how the biological sex of the channeler determines their interaction with magic. They gonads decide.

HOWEVER, I can't help but think this is a distraction from much larger issues of culture, character, the voice of female characters, interactions between the sexes, and themes in the narrative that are much-much more directly relevant in terms of literary criticism. We have gender roles and glass ceilings and sexism and chauvenism in the real world.

We don't have people conjuring wind or healing with their minds if they're girls and guys gibbering about the Invisible Wind Monster in his head while shooting lightning.

Strangely, and this may come as a shock, I can manage both. Lots of feminists who do literary criticism manage to both do literary criticism, and to also have views on other things, and have real lives. Isn't that just the most amazing thing?

Besides, the original discussion which spawned this discussion was some poster claiming he liked the WoT magic system while disliking the ASOIAF one. Hence my laying out everything that is wrong with the WoT magic system.

However, if you are really into telling me how I don't understand the feminist implications of WoT, then perhaps it would be a good idea to take it over to the Feminism thread, where you can explain it further.