WOT questions, advice needed and given.

[SilentRoamer]

Lyanna,

That definition of gender essentialism: to "justify inequities and constraints which harm women", seems very lopsided. It seems to go under the assumption that the gender essentialism (which I refute as only being relevant to a fictional magic mechanism" and not to varying gender roles in the series) only has a negative impact where women are concerned?

I am in no way claiming WoT is feminist (in truth I probably don't even understand feminism) but personally I never saw massive issues and one of the fundamental messages I came away with from the series was that Men and Women can work better together and the whole exceeds the sum of our parts. That being said there are obvious issues with the way RJ writes female characters - but if you take the setting into context I think RJ was ahead of the game in at least trying to be less gender essentialist (in terms of cultural settings).

I'm a man though so what do I know! *tugs braid*

[Lyanna Stark]

Lyanna,

That definition of gender essentialism: to "justify inequities and constraints which harm women", seems very lopsided. It seems to go under the assumption that the gender essentialism (which I refute as only being relevant to a fictional magic mechanism" and not to varying gender roles in the series) only has a negative impact where women are concerned?

It has a stronger negative impact on women since the attributes associated with women are valued less than the attributes attributed to men. That does not mean that men don't suffer from restrictive gender roles and patriarchy. Far from it. If you want to read more about it, the Feminism101 link has a FAQ, which can be helpful to get started, alternatively, google "bell hooks feminism is for everybody" and you can read the first two chapters in PDF-format. They're short, instructive and not complicated, plus they give a good general orientation without being preachy.

I am in no way claiming WoT is feminist (in truth I probably don't even understand feminism) but personally I never saw massive issues and one of the fundamental messages I came away with from the series was that Men and Women can work better together and the whole exceeds the sum of our parts. That being said there are obvious issues with the way RJ writes female characters - but if you take the setting into context I think RJ was ahead of the game in at least trying to be less gender essentialist (in terms of cultural settings).

I'm a man though so what do I know! *tugs braid*

The "working together" in its concept, includes that men and women are separate but equal, and that the differences are definite and innate. With this, we end up in a lot of entanglements like how our physical body means destiny, and how women who are not gentle and submissive are then by their very nature unnatural, just like men who are gentle and submissive are similarly unnatural, i.e. breaking of the gender roles become breaking with what is your destiny. As with Nynaeve, this is then even punished in-narrative.

To get down to the sex/gender divide, since I got my extra cup of coffee and found some helpful links:

I don't see where is the problem that magic works different based on the gender. In fact, I think that WoT is as feminist as it can get considering that the entire world is ran by women.

These two statements show a fundamental misunderstanding of a. what feminism means, b. the difference between sex and gender and c. gender essentialism and what it means

1st, the Strawfeminist - "Femininst want the world to be run by women": Contrary to common misinformation, feminists aren't after women ruling the world, feminism is about ending sexism and about promoting equality. bell hooks posits in "Feminism is for everybody"

Simply put, feminism is a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression.

Now that we've got that out of the way, female representation is a good thing, but in and of itself it only says very little about whether a work is sexist or not. After all, you have lots of women in porn movies, but I wouldn't call them paragons of feminism, most of the time. You may get a more help by running the Bechdel test. Representation is one facet, how the female characters interact is another. Only looking at one aspect out of a whole will get you a skewed picture.

2. Sex/gender - no, they are not the same. I'm going to link to this explanation. Suffice to say, the sex assigned at birth (and yes "assigned" since nobody actually tests your chromosomes) may or may not correlate to your gender identity.

Gender on the other hand is far more complicated. It is the complex interrelationship between an individual’s sex (gender biology), one’s internal sense of self as male, female, both or neither (gender identity) as well as one’s outward presentations and behaviors (gender expression) related to that perception, including their gender role. Together, the intersection of these three dimensions produces one’s authentic sense of gender, both in how people experience their own gender as well as how others perceive it

Hence "male" and "female" are far less fixed entities than people often like to believe.

3. Gender essentialism - the Mysterious Female Essence

Gender essentialists deny that there is a difference between sex and gender, or that there can be a sliding scale. The sex assigned at birth is innate and fixed, and hence there is no need for gender, since it matches your sex, always. Further, due to this innateness, the we have the Essences, which are Male and Female, respectively, and how women are Simply Born different from men, with innate attributes like altruism, gentleness and a tendency towards being submissive; while men on the other hand are born decisive, grasping the world, wrestling into shape around them.

As these attributes are fixed, fighting against them becomes unnatural, and you are fighting a Natural Order. Of course, essentialists also believes that this is needed, since men and women compliment each other, as two opposites.

Which, as it happens, is exactly like the divide in the One Power in WoT.

[David Selig]

Gender essentialism is a common criticism of the Wheel of Time books but, frankly, it's really-really annoying to me because the criticisms kind of ignore Robert Jordan is one of the few authors in the history of the fantasy genre where not only is roughly half or more of the cast female but they're also the movers and shakers of the plot. They also wield positions of power, authority, and influence throughout the book on every level.

It is not 1975 anymore. Fantasy novels with plenty of important female characters are everywhere these days.

One major character comes from a all-Queen ruled country where one of the EVIL plots is to install a KING on the throne.

Which is just, Pfftt, ****ing LUDICROUS.

And evil.

Uh, it was evil because the claimant was a freaking Forsaken. Not because a man tried to become king.

[Esa1996]

It never bothered you that you like a system to inherently sexist?

You think it's alright that women should be submissive and embrace their side of the One Power?

No, it never bothered me as I never saw it as sexist. You're the first person ever to tell me it is sexist.

I see what you mean with the embracing stuff but it never bothered me either. Granted, if it were me writing WOT, I probably wouldn't have made it so that women embrace and men seize the One Power, but even so it doesn't bother me.

I'd think that you'd have far more problems with ASOIAF than WOT if gender equality is important for you. Personally, as they are books, I don't think any kind of violence or injustice etc. could put me off from a book I like. At least it has never happened before, not even with the Seanchan who pretty much made me want to punch a wall every time I saw the name. :D (That is actually one of the things I like about Jordan's writing. He's the only author ever to make me feel any real anger or hate towards fictional characters. No other author has succeeded in it, or at least not nearly in the same amount).

[Lyanna Stark]

I'd think that you'd have far more problems with ASOIAF than WOT if gender equality is important for you.

Are you serious? ASOIAF has absolutely fabulous criticism of patriarchy and some of the most amazing problematising of being a woman trying to gain agency in a sexist society. Every single one of the female characters grapple with one or several aspects of what it means to suffer from a lack of privilege and extremely restrictive gender roles. If anything, ASOIAF is more feminist than any number of SFF novels I have encountered in that it shines a light on exactly what the practical repercussions of inequality really means, from forced marriages to lack of career choices to inability to inherit, being mocked for falling outside the gender norms and a host of other things.

Personally, as they are books, I don't think any kind of violence or injustice etc. could put me off from a book I like. At least it has never happened before, not even with the Seanchan who pretty much made me want to punch a wall every time I saw the name. :D (That is actually one of the things I like about Jordan's writing. He's the only author ever to make me feel any real anger or hate towards fictional characters. No other author has succeeded in it, or at least not nearly in the same amount).

Right, you shut off your brain and stop thinking when you are reading. This does not happen to all of us.

It is not 1975 anymore. Fantasy novels with plenty of important female characters are everywhere these days.

Quite. Claiming that inclusion of female characters is some sort of novelty to be thankful for is ludicrous.

[Immortal Spartan]

So I posted in the wrong forum about advice for a book to read while I wait for TWOW. Got a lot of good feed back and was told to come here. So after reading through all the books people advised me to try I landed on Wheel of time and ordered it on my kindle 2 nights ago. I am about 50 pages in and let me tell you its been hard to get into it. I know its hard switching books and getting to know the new world/characters/rules etc. But, I mean this is a huge series, 15 books or some crazy number. Which I will totally read. But, is it worth it. Is it epic enough to get into? I know nothing of the series. So people who have read it will it draw me in? will it consume my fantasy love? Let me know and thanks for the help everyone. I would be lost without you guys!

Hey Sparrow,

If I'm not mistaken, I believe in a later post you mentioned that you came to fantasy via ASOIAF. I had a similar experience. My first fantasy book was A Game of Thrones. I was hooked from that point. ASOIAF is by far my favorite fantasy series.

I'll say this: fantasy comes in many flavors. Don't be nervous to try the various types of fantasy to figure out which flavors you like. And once you find out what you like, don't apologize for it; you like what you like.

I finished the first novel in the WOT series, The Eye of the World, not too long ago and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I knew going into the series that it was different in many ways to ASOIAF, so I set those expectations to the side. I also read many of the criticisms that have been levied against the series so that I would be aware, but I also set most of those aside so that I could form my own opinion. Like I said, I enjoyed it, and if I reach a point in the series where I'm not enjoying it (to the point that I want to stop reading it), then I'll just stop (and read a summary of how the series ends); that won't take away from the enjoyment that I got from the earlier books.

Most of the (more vocal) fans on this forum seem to have a specific taste when it comes to fantasy. (They have good taste, but it's a specific taste.) I would keep that in mind when looking for feedback on this forum. There are millions of fans who love the WOT, and they would offer a different perspective on the series.

[David Selig]

Quite. Claiming that inclusion of female characters is some sort of novelty to be thankful for is ludicrous.

To be fair to Jordan, having so many prominent female characters and a society where women are either equal or somewhat dominant, depending on the country,was way more rare back in the early 1990s when he started the series.

[Rickeen Stark]

To the OP, I'd suggest reading at least the first book to see if you want to read any more or not, that is usually how I go about things. Does the series have flaws? Yes. Should they stop you from enjoying it? No. People like different things for different reasons ( I've met some who don't even like to read fantasy books! ;'( )

Seeking advice is fine and all, but only you can judge what entertains you! Read it all first, then you can feel free to complain! <3

[Esa1996]

Are you serious? ASOIAF has absolutely fabulous criticism of patriarchy and some of the most amazing problematising of being a woman trying to gain agency in a sexist society. Every single one of the female characters grapple with one or several aspects of what it means to suffer from a lack of privilege and extremely restrictive gender roles. If anything, ASOIAF is more feminist than any number of SFF novels I have encountered in that it shines a light on exactly what the practical repercussions of inequality really means, from forced marriages to lack of career choices to inability to inherit, being mocked for falling outside the gender norms and a host of other things.

It may criticize the system but the female characters in ASOIAF are mostly in quite bad situations partly due to being women. In WOT the women don't get problems for being women as the world is far closer to gender equality. This is just what I think I might think if equality in books were an important thing for me. I'm no expert on equal rights nor anything related. I just like WOT.

[Esa1996]

Hey Sparrow,

If I'm not mistaken, I believe in a later post you mentioned that you came to fantasy via ASOIAF. I had a similar experience. My first fantasy book was A Game of Thrones. I was hooked from that point. ASOIAF is by far my favorite fantasy series.

I'll say this: fantasy comes in many flavors. Don't be nervous to try the various types of fantasy to figure out which flavors you like. And once you find out what you like, don't apologize for it; you like what you like.

I finished the first novel in the WOT series, The Eye of the World, not too long ago and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I knew going into the series that it was different in many ways to ASOIAF, so I set those expectations to the side. I also read many of the criticisms that have been levied against the series so that I would be aware, but I also set most of those aside so that I could form my own opinion. Like I said, I enjoyed it, and if I reach a point in the series where I'm not enjoying it (to the point that I want to stop reading it), then I'll just stop (and read a summary of how the series ends); that won't take away from the enjoyment that I got from the earlier books.

Most of the (more vocal) fans on this forum seem to have a specific taste when it comes to fantasy. (They have good taste, but it's a specific taste.) I would keep that in mind when looking for freedback on this forum. There are millions of fans who love the WOT, and they would offer a different perspective on the series.

Good post. I too, heard of WOT on this forum after having read ASOIAF, and decided to read it after my first (and thus far only) re-read of ASOIAF while waiting for TWOW. After the comments I'd read here I didn't think it was going to be anything beyond decent, but I went with it anyway thinking that I would read perhaps 30 pages a day on average or something, and that I would finish it around summer 2015 (I started on the 7th of February 2014). Turned out it was far better than I had anticipated and I finished it on the 28th of April 2014, only 79 days after starting it, instead of the planned ~500 days.

For me what got me into fantasy was Harry Potter around 13 or so years ago (I was 6). Overall I read the HP series a total of 10 times, reading LotR & Hobbit (Both twice), Inheritance Cycle, Hunger Games and some others between all the HP books, before discovering GOT in the summer of 2012. Began reading the books a few weeks later, and took around two or three months to read them. Immediately re-read them, finishing on the 1st of January 2014. It was during 2013 while surfing on this forum that I discovered WOT and Malazan. Began Malazan two days after finishing WOT. Stormlight Archives the day I finished Malazan, Kingkiller Chronicles the day I finished Stormlight, The Second Apocalypse the day I finished Kingkiller. Took a few days pause before trying Abercombie's The First Law. It never really hit me though, so I left it unfinished at around page 100-150 and began my first re-read of WOT (On the 4th of May 2015). Halfway through the third book at the moment.

[TheRevanchist]

Good post. I too, heard of WOT on this forum after having read ASOIAF, and decided to read it after my first (and thus far only) re-read of ASOIAF while waiting for TWOW. After the comments I'd read here I didn't think it was going to be anything beyond decent, but I went with it anyway thinking that I would read perhaps 30 pages a day on average or something, and that I would finish it around summer 2015 (I started on the 7th of February 2014). Turned out it was far better than I had anticipated and I finished it on the 28th of April 2014, only 79 days after starting it, instead of the planned ~500 days.

For me what got me into fantasy was Harry Potter around 13 or so years ago (I was 6). Overall I read the HP series a total of 10 times, reading LotR & Hobbit (Both twice), Inheritance Cycle, Hunger Games and some others between all the HP books, before discovering GOT in the summer of 2012. Began reading the books a few weeks later, and took around two or three months to read them. Immediately re-read them, finishing on the 1st of January 2014. It was during 2013 while surfing on this forum that I discovered WOT and Malazan. Began Malazan two days after finishing WOT. Stormlight Archives the day I finished Malazan, Kingkiller Chronicles the day I finished Stormlight, The Second Apocalypse the day I finished Kingkiller. Took a few days pause before trying Abercombie's The First Law. It never really hit me though, so I left it unfinished at around page 100-150 and began my first re-read of WOT (On the 4th of May 2015). Halfway through the third book at the moment.

Wow! It took me exactly the same time (compared to 49 days for ASOIAF).

[Esa1996]

Wow! It took me exactly the same time (compared to 49 days for ASOIAF).

:D Took me 42 days to read ASOS, AFFC and ADWD. Unfortunately I do not know how long it took me to read books 1 and 2. If my speed had been the same back then as it was with books 3-5 it would've been 65 days total, but I think I was a bit slower as I already knew what was going to happen.

[Buckwheat]

:wideeyed: People count how many days it takes them to read a book?

And this thread taught me to not feel guilty about not reading WOT. Actually from how many times it is just mentioned on the forum, I had thought it was better regarded.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

You keep close track of how long it takes you to read a book or series? Really?

[Immortal Spartan]

Plenty of people keep track of the amount of time it takes them to read a book. For many bookreaders (not all), there's a correlation between how much they enjoy a book/series and how quickly they read it.

I don't keep those types of stats in my head, but I do keep track of my reading progress on goodreads.com, therefore I can easily tell how long it takes me to read a book.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Reading a difficult book takes longer than a plup fantasy/scifi/thriller. A "fast" read is not by definition a "good" read.

[TheRevanchist]

:wideeyed: People count how many days it takes them to read a book?

And this thread taught me to not feel guilty about not reading WOT. Actually from how many times it is just mentioned on the forum, I had thought it was better regarded.

People seem to either love it, or hate it.

Considering how many people love it (and also that it is the second most sold fantasy series of all time) it isn't the worst idea ever to give it a try.

[SilentRoamer]

I personally record a start date/end date for everything I read.

Ser Scot do you really find that so surprising?

I personally do it to try and keep me motivated to get through my TBR pile.

[TheRevanchist]

You keep close track of how long it takes you to read a book or series? Really?

I remember doing that for ASOIAF. For WoT is simple cause I started it in the day I bought a kindle and I know when I finished the last book from goodreads.

I remember reading Mistborn trilogy for 4 days, and The First Law trilogy for 5 days. I did less than a week for both LotR and Kingskiller Chronicles, although I am not sure if it was 4 or 5 or 6 days :cool4:

[Gasp of Many Reeds]

My views on the gender essentialism issue: it's in there partly because of Jordan's own traditional 'complementarist' views on men and women, which are sexist in sense that they see there to be quite rigid and fairly suffocating ascribed social roles for both men and women, but which isn't to be confused with straightforward misogyny. But Jordan also took inspiration from traditions such as Taoism with its yin-yang dualism, which takes complementarian views on sex to a more metaphysical and world-constitutive level.

it should be noted that gender essentialism shouldn't be conflated with anti-feminism - many influential first and second-wave feminists were gender essentialists of some form or another who did think women were fundamentally different from men. I'd largely credit Judith Butler and her followers with moving mainstream feminism firmly into the camp of viewing gender as distinct from sex and as performative (though this shouldn't ignore the fact that a good deal of second-wave feminists, most notably Simone de Beauvoir, were very much not gender essentialists).