Jump to content

is the WoT series worth reading


eac

Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, Risto said:

But, does it mean it is better? Yes, we have over 300 named Aes Sedai, not counting other female channelers, royalty, etc. and yet I find Eowyn's story far more beautiful and poetic than 95% of female storyarc. It ended traditionally, fitting into what Tolkien's ideas about women were, but Eowyn for me remains one of those female characters who symbolizes everything that is equal in strength and desire. Jordan's women fade in memory. Eowyn, yes, lone as she is, lingers. 

I think you're being a bit unfair. While the main female characters in WoT do share some traits for plot convenience (i.e. heroism), they still react differently to the situations they face. In fact, that's kind of a plot point at several times in the series.

And when you start looking at secondary characters you find tons of different female personalities, especially if you include a few antagonists.

For me it was always the very opposite. Eowyn was a secondary character in LotR that could have easily been forgotten if not for her one glorious act against the witch king, while WoT had females as main characters influencing the story throughout the books. In fact, WoT put females in positions of actual power and agency, which isn't even that common in the genre as a whole. And... Come on, Moiraine, Siuan or Egwene aren't that easy to forget.

Also, Verin's story is on a level of awesomeness of its own. It's one of the side stories that truly stand out because of how well it was done.

I also really enjoyed the character of Mat Cauthon, for obvious reasons.

Anyway, WoT has many faults. But it's a very good source material for a modern adaptation. With good writers and a good budget, the TV show could be amazing. I'm really looking forward to that TV show precisely because it can erase all the problems with the books. In a way, the WoT TV series could be the very reverse of GoT: while GoT struggles to do justice to the complexity of the source material, a WoT series could easily take the best parts of the books and leave behind the worse passages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, I always hated Mat, from the beginning. I know this is blasphemy somehow. I think its cause he reminded me way too much of someone I knew in high school.

Also, as long as I'm being a heretic, I never got the love for Lord of Chaos. I'd rank it as the second or third worst of all of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said:

You know, I always hated Mat, from the beginning. I know this is blasphemy somehow. I think its cause he reminded me way too much of someone I knew in high school.

Also, as long as I'm being a heretic, I never got the love for Lord of Chaos. I'd rank it as the second or third worst of all of them.

Spoiler

Mat was extremely boring for the first 5 books or so, but since then (to some degree, because the best character in the saga, kind of 'died' at the end of the fifth book), he was arguably the best character in the books and amazing in the final one.

But in the first 5 books or so, God, he was such an annoying little bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Rippounet said:

For me it was always the very opposite. Eowyn was a secondary character in LotR that could have easily been forgotten if not for her one glorious act against the witch king, while WoT had females as main characters influencing the story throughout the books. In fact, WoT put females in positions of actual power and agency, which isn't even that common in the genre as a whole. And... Come on, Moiraine, Siuan or Egwene aren't that easy to forget.

Well, I understand I am a bit generalizing when speaking about female characters. While there are some things that Jordan did right, there are so many things that I truly felt were completely off. I don't think of him as a terrible writer, but I do wish he had taken more care when writing female characters.

Eowyn is yes, secondary character, but every word around her is borderline magical. Tolkien is a true master of the words and the descriptions and dialogues of Eowyn is what makes her memorable. Whether it is Aragorn's description of her or her words of what frightens her, she represents the duality in what we today consider a female strength - the one that equals to male and the other, unique, feminine one. I have forgotten many deeds of WoT ladies, but Eowyn lingers in my memory. Perhaps it is just me but I find her character absolutely amazing.

Spoiler

 

Siuan was my favorite throughout the series and I have enjoyed her chapters. But, even though the series is completed, her storyline was simply brought to somewhat, unceremonious ending. It really pissed me off when I read it.

On the other hand, Egwene had that the most glorious of all glorified moments. And yes, it is memorable. And my imagination did wonders with her heroic act, but the way she has been dealing with her role and position also bugged me. 

 

I may be ready for the reread because it does seem that I missed something. That said, I am not sure I will find it on the reread. But, once can try :D 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Rippounet said:

And... Come on, Moiraine, Siuan or Egwene aren't that easy to forget.

  Reveal hidden contents

Also, Verin's story is on a level of awesomeness of its own. It's one of the side stories that truly stand out because of how well it was done.

 

For the life of me I can't remember a single character trait of those three.  Maybe I didn't read far enough, or I was not invested enough? (was it book 5 or 7? it was definitely after a circus thing where some girl kept saying clothes were fit for a slut while her mind very much wanted to dress her like a slut or something and some ridiculous scheme where the enemy wanted some protagonist so the protagonists decided to confront them alone. genius. ) I rember who they are (Gandalf, childhood friend, other continent princess, I think) but all that's left is that they have the power (not sure for siuan, was she part of the boat wind witch thing?) they stare down men and it works, and they sniff. and men are err, wooly heads or something like that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moiraine is Gandalf only on the first book. Like the series, her character totally diverges from LotR comparisons.

I find her one of the best written characters in the entire genre, and she has definitely a lot of depth. Oh, and the prequel is a must-read purely because she is the main character there.

Siuan was good too, but unfortunately a bit under used. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheRevanchist said:

Moiraine is Gandalf only on the first book. Like the series, her character totally diverges from LotR comparisons.

If you say so.

I was just disagreeing with the assertion that they weren't easy to forget, insofar as my own anecdotical experience went, because while I remembered their names and roles, I didn't remember any defining character trait that wasn't shared between all the women in the series (in my recollections.)

 

But as I wrote it might be that I did not care enough in the first place, or did not read enough (though at least 5 books should be enough to build a character... actually even a third of a single book ought to be enough for any author with even mediocre skill)

 

ETA: While you're at it (Moiraine being the best written character, you know...) could you refresh my memory: how would you describe those three characters without mentioning what they did (that would be spoilers anyway), or look like, only what kind of person they are, and how that makes them different from the two others?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheRevanchist said:

I find her one of the best written characters in the entire genre, and she has definitely a lot of depth. Oh, and the prequel is a must-read purely because she is the main character there.

Wow... That's the exaggeration, if I ever heard one. Moiraine doesn't diverge from her LOTR counterpart as much as one would wish.

Spoiler

1. Her death and resurrection were very Gandalfian. She even came back stronger than before thanks to the necklace angreal.

2. Her work on unifying various nations resembles Gandalf's efforts against Sauron and work in Rohan and Gondor.

She had been and remained Gandalfian figure in the series. Many problematic aspects of her storyline, in my book, leaves her far from the best written characters in the world of fantasy. That said, she is an interesting character. Her adventures are fun to read but that would pretty much be that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess that the bottom line for eac and anyone else considering starting WoT is just to get your hands on a copy of The Eye of the World and take it from there. The first one is more of a quest, so I'd wait till you're done with The Great Hunt before deciding to quit or go on.

That way, you can make up your own mind. :)

I feel kind of jealous for those who'll meet Rand, Mat, Perrin, Lan, Moiraine, Thom, and all the others for the first time. . . :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha. Can't believe I never noticed this before. The only reason I noticed it now was because of the WoT/LotR comparisons in this thread.

 

In the second book there is an inn called The Nine Rings. Rand sees it and thinks "The Nine Rings had been one of his favorite adventure stories when he was a boy; he supposed it still was".

Was that supposed to be a LotR's reference by Jordan?

And a second thing that I'm even more embarrassed about that I never noticed from the second book.

 

Verin tells Ingtar,"Moraine Sedai sent me". Then at the very end of the novel Moraine says, "I did not send Verin, she did that on her own."

A straight up lie that I never noticed. :blush:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Errant Bard said:

But as I wrote it might be that I did not care enough in the first place, or did not read enough (though at least 5 books should be enough to build a character... actually even a third of a single book ought to be enough for any author with even mediocre skill)

Depends on the genre, depends on the book(s).

Jordan was good with character arcs. All his characters grow and learn. And sure, at times it feels like some characters are kind of interchangeable and that they all develop very similar traits, but then heroes do tend to be a bit similar, and it's not easy to write very different female characters when there's almost a dozen of them who actually iinfluence the plot.

5 hours ago, Errant Bard said:

I was just disagreeing with the assertion that they weren't easy to forget, insofar as my own anecdotical experience went, because while I remembered their names and roles, I didn't remember any defining character trait that wasn't shared between all the women in the series (in my recollections.)

ETA: While you're at it (Moiraine being the best written character, you know...) could you refresh my memory: how would you describe those three characters without mentioning what they did (that would be spoilers anyway), or look like, only what kind of person they are, and how that makes them different from the two others?

Well first, all three are hard to forget precisely because of what they do and what happens to them. Anyone having finished the series will remember Moiraine, Egwene and Siuan because they are very important for the story.
We're talking about fantasy here, it's not like characters will be developed like in a Flaubert novel.

So as far as describing characters goes it's a bit tricky if you can't talk about what they do, what they look like, or who they are (in terms of origin stories). If you think about it, by that standard, it would become hard to distinguish many fantasy characters. Would you find it that easy to distinguish Aragorn from Gandalf or Jon from Dany without talking about what they do or look like? It's not that it's not possible, it's just that it takes a writer's talent to do it.

So I can try (even though it's been years since I read the series, so I'm sure others can do a better job). At the beginning of the story:
- Moiraine is a Gandalf-like figure. She's wise and cunning, and good with people (she's a born diplomat) ; something of an intellectual and schemer (she's not above deceiving people if it suits her), but almost always in a subtle way. She's obviously brave but not to the point of foolishness. She's hard on enemies but compasionate with others.
- Siuan is an authority figure. She's extremely assertive and a born leader. That makes her rather arrogant, stubborn, and somehow hard to reason with (she can be a bit ruthless, even to other humans). Though she tries to be fair (in her own way) she has too much confidence in herself and her skills.
- Egwene... That's a tougher one. As the daughter of the local mayor she's used to being assertive (and a bit stubborn and arrogant too). However, when the story begins she's also somewhat naive, and can be something of a dreamer (there's a "country girl" side to her). Her arrogance and assertiveness actually hide her inner doubts about herself and the path she wants to take. Her humble origins mean she's very curious about the world, and aware that she has a lot to learn. She can be a bit over-confident and impatient though, which can also make her reckless, though she does learn (/is taught) humility and caution. She's also quick-witted though at the start of the story her lack of knowledge prevents her from being truly clever.

Now obviously:

Siuan and Egwene share a lot of traits because... They're both Amyrlins! And yet I remember thinking that Egwene was more subtle than Siuan somehow, having learned through different means. And of course their arcs are reversed: while Egwene must learn to develop slyness and authority in order to take the amyrlin seat, Siuan faces a fall from power (in several ways) and must find humility again.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, A True Kaniggit said:

Haha. Can't believe I never noticed this before. The only reason I noticed it now was because of the WoT/LotR comparisons in this thread.

  Hide contents

In the second book there is an inn called The Nine Rings. Rand sees it and thinks "The Nine Rings had been one of his favorite adventure stories when he was a boy; he supposed it still was".

Was that supposed to be a LotR's reference by Jordan?

And a second thing that I'm even more embarrassed about that I never noticed from the second book.

  Hide contents

Verin tells Ingtar,"Moraine Sedai sent me". Then at the very end of the novel Moraine says, "I did not send Verin, she did that on her own."

A straight up lie that I never noticed. :blush:

RE your second point.  I remember several threads at wotmania asking about that line.  Prior to the big reveal for her character, most assumed it was one of those quasi truths AS use so frequently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said:

Yeah if nothing else Jordan was great with the foreshadowing.

:agree: 

Theres a reason that I spent hours upon hours of my limited dial up internet time reading theories on who killed a certain Forsaken, who is Demandred hiding as (I still think Jordan changed that one after fans figured it out) and many far more trivial questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Rhom said:

:agree: 

Theres a reason that I spent hours upon hours of my limited dial up internet time reading theories on who killed a certain Forsaken, who is Demandred hiding as (I still think Jordan changed that one after fans figured it out) and many far more trivial questions.

What was the theory about it?

I actually don't like much the Sharan parts. It was just briefly mentioned, to play that big role in the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, End of Disc One said:

Wasn't it revealed after AMoL came out that Taimandred was both real and that he killed you know who, but Jordan changed it because fans figured it out?  If so, you can't blame the Taimandredists too much.

Where is that 'revelation' supposed to have taken place? Taimandredists have been claiming "Jordan changed it because we figured it out" for about as long as the theory has been debunked. I have never seen one bit of evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...