Wheel of Time: The 2nd Turning (Book Spoilers Inclusive)

[Ran]

34 minutes ago, fionwe1987 said:

To me, that is troubling.

This is purely because people are trying to gaslight others on this topic in a way that they aren't gaslighting them about all the other numerous flaws of this show. People have deployed all sorts of approaches: "Oh, you misunderstand," "Oh, Jordan didn't actually describe that," "Oh, the Two Rivers isn't really isolated", "Oh, this actress looks *exactly* like how I imagined the character" even when any cursory look up of the character makes you realize that there's very little similarity.

Just say: "Yeah, they changed it from the books because the books aren't as diverse as we think our audience is." It's honest. It's straightforward.  It's simple. Condal and Sapochnik did exactly that when interviewed about House of the Dragon, and it worked very well. People hate being misled or actively lied to by the makers of the entertainment they consume. 

The insistence on speculating that Jordan "would do things differently" if he was writing now is kind of infuriating to me, because it presupposes that whoever says it somehow had intimate knowledge of Jordan that would allow them to say such a thing. It's nonsense. No one bloody knows what Jordan would have done were he starting WoT today. Not me, not you, not Harriet, and certainly not Rafe Judkins. Judkins reaching for that language was one of the earliest indicators that this show was going to be in trouble.

@IlyaP

Quote

Had a google, but I don't think what I've seen/found has been helpful. What's a blood of all nations world? This is an unfamiliar concept to me.

Their behind the scenes on costuming revealed a map that was color-coded with various culture groups. But a very broad swath of Randland was one color, and the label for that was basically "Western - blend of all cultures" (which I misremembered as "Blood of all nations"), which I take to mean that a lot of the action will be taking place in a region specifically intended to be really diverse/cosmpolitan in the way the modern West is. The Two Rivers, Andor, and much of central Randland was depicted as being this "Western, blend of all cultures" place.

Edited June 23, 2023 by Ran

[Slurktan]

28 minutes ago, fionwe1987 said:

Unless the Aiel were unutterably thick, the descendents of the water-sharers were identified using more than just simple cultural or physical markers of distinctiveness that the Aiel noticed in the VR replay of their ancestors they have regularly been getting for millenia. 

 

Or it was based on that but as they didn't need to know that info for 2500 years, the pattern didn't show them that info.

[IlyaP]

13 minutes ago, Ran said:

But a very broad swath of Randland was one color, and the label for that was basically "Western - blend of all cultures" (which I misremembered as "Blood of all nations"), which I take to mean that a lot of the action will be taking place in a region specifically intended to be really diverse/cosmpolitan in the way the modern West is.

*Scratches head*

I'm confused. A broad swatch of Randland* is one color, but it's also cosmpolitan and a blend of colors at the same time? Or, do you mean, that, like, pockets of RL will be one particular skin color, but then other parts will be more diverse? Also, is there some other meaning to blood of all nations beyond some apparent (from what I can find?) biblical allusion? Like, does it hold some other meaning as well in the English language that was never taught to me?

 

* Thank you for this. I know the RPG had some other name for it, like the Westlands or something, but to me, it's Randland forever!

[Ran]

1 minute ago, IlyaP said:

*Scratches head*

Ah! Sorry, they were simply color-coding the map to show different culture boundaries. Red, blue, aqua, yellow, purple, etc. -- not skin colors.

 

[IlyaP]

9 minutes ago, Ran said:

Ah! Sorry, they were simply color-coding the map to show different culture boundaries. Red, blue, aqua, yellow, purple, etc. -- not skin colors.

 

Gotcha. That makes more sense to me. Was unaware of this map - though I've not watched behind the scenes videos, thus didn't know about this.

[Myrddin]

IlyaP was expecting the Nav'i to be living in parts of Randland.

Or the smurfs.

[IFR]

For me, the change I disliked the most - and I disliked so many of the changes in the show - is that it is believed that the Dragon prophesied could be a man or a woman. In my mind, this undermines a crucial tension of the series.

People may point out that now that the Dragon Reborn is established as a man, the tension is still in play. But to me, this is a consequential change that would dramatically alter how the public would respond to Rand as the Dragon Reborn. There would be much greater skepticism involved, even when he fulfills the signs of the prophesy, because of course people would like to believe that the savior is going to be someone who won't go mad and literally break the world (that it would be more of the socioeconomic kind of breaking that a woman might bring). And I have full confidence that the writers will not in any way handle this line of reasoning. They almost certainly will ignore it.

I also hate that power progression has already been rendered nonsensical by the end of the first season. Dumai's Well is no longer some exciting point to build up to any longer, because mere novices massacred hundreds of the Dark One's minions already, so who cares about Dumai's Well now? 

And I would be delighted if people repeatedly complained about these poorly calculated changes. But I also think that the ethnicity changes made in this show is comparably stupid to the many other bad changes. So it is nice to see the show regularly castigated for this.

[Corvinus85]

45 minutes ago, Myrddin said:

IlyaP was expecting the Nav'i to be living in parts of Randland.

Or the smurfs.

Just wait for the Finn.

[Poobah]

1 hour ago, Ran said:

This is purely because people are trying to gaslight others on this topic in a way that they aren't gaslighting them about all the other numerous flaws of this show. People have deployed all sorts of approaches: "Oh, you misunderstand," "Oh, Jordan didn't actually describe that," "Oh, the Two Rivers isn't really isolated", "Oh, this actress looks *exactly* like how I imagined the character" even when any cursory look up of the character makes you realize that there's very little similarity.

Just say: "Yeah, they changed it from the books because the books aren't as diverse as we think our audience is." It's honest. It's straightforward.  It's simple. Condal and Sapochnik did exactly that when interviewed about House of the Dragon, and it worked very well. People hate being misled or actively lied to by the makers of the entertainment they consume. 

The insistence on speculating that Jordan "would do things differently" if he was writing now is kind of infuriating to me, because it presupposes that whoever says it somehow had intimate knowledge of Jordan that would allow them to say such a thing. It's nonsense. No one bloody knows what Jordan would have done were he starting WoT today. Not me, not you, not Harriet, and certainly not Rafe Judkins. Judkins reaching for that language was one of the earliest indicators that this show was going to be in trouble.

I've already said my piece on this, probably multiple times, as have you, as has everyone in this thread and given that the topic seems to irritate everybody involved every time it comes up I'm not sure why it keeps being regurgitated. 

Can we set aside the disingenuous accusations for a moment and consider that there are multiple ways to engage with a text? That the things I find interesting, important, and core to the world Jordan built and themes he was exploring are simply different to the things you do? If you think I'm wrong you're obviously entitled to your own differing opinion but that doesn't make me a liar. Do we all really need to get out our "who is the biggest Jordan nerd/scholar" dicks and have a measure to see which boarder gets to be the authority that defines the one true interpretation... it seems like a facile way to engage with such a massive text (not to mention supplementary materials) but if we must I'm prepared to unzip. 

[IFR]

13 minutes ago, Poobah said:

Can we set aside the disingenuous accusations for a moment and consider that there are multiple ways to engage with a text?

This goes both ways, though, doesn't it? I don't know about you, but I often see accusations that frame objections to the change of ethnicity as racist in origin. There seems to be a strange unwillingness to acknowledge that, as you said, there are multiple ways to engage the text and it is perfectly valid for someone to not enjoy the changes in ethnicity for purely story related reasons.

It doesn't feel great to be accused of being a racist. And it makes a discussion particularly frustrating when people refuse to engage that you may have a valid position, but rather immediately declare that the true motivation behind your objections are suspect.

[Ran]

33 minutes ago, Poobah said:

That the things I find interesting, important, and core to the world Jordan built and themes he was exploring are simply different to the things you do?

I have no problem with this, and never have. But I've never been a fan of telling people that X does not happen in the text when X does, in fact, happen.

Quote

 If you think I'm wrong you're obviously entitled to your own differing opinion but that doesn't make me a liar.

The specific claim you made earlier in the thread was wrong, yes:

Quote

Jordan does give a few passing mentions to things like skin colour or eye shape for a few characters (though I think he mentions Faile's huge beaky nose more often than either) but the characters pretty much never remark upon it 

"Passing mentions" is very much underplaying the fact that Jordan consistently used descriptions of characters as a shorthand for where they come from and even what sort of person they may be. Mustachioed Murandians are sexist pigs, tall fair Aiel are stoic, titled-eyed Saldean women are a handful, short pale Cairhienin are schemers, coppery willow Domani can't help but flirt with men, etc.

In contrast, it's worth noting that the Seanchan are the truly diverse cosmopolitan society, having forged all the different ethnic groups into one thoroughly blended empire, so you get all sorts of people side-by-side and throughout the ranks of the society, from the least to the greatest, and so ethnic appearance basically gets remarked on solely because it's part of someone's appearance rather than an indicator of their culture (since they all have just, basically, a monoculture). In fact, the clothing they wear and their styling and accoutrements matters more as a character signifier, as the Seanchan express social and military rank that  way. 

I appreciate those who admit they changed things because they wanted to "update" to what they prefer to see. It's honest and straightforward. 

Edited June 23, 2023 by Ran

[IlyaP]

2 hours ago, Myrddin said:

IlyaP was expecting the Nav'i to be living in parts of Randland.

Or the smurfs.

100% would watch the hell out of that. Who needs drugs when you have Wheel of Smurfdora?!

[Myrddin]

Smurf and smurfing ashes. Its the smurfing Smurf Reborn here to smurf the smurf out of the smurfing goat-smurfed world.

<Smurfette tugs braid>

Edited June 23, 2023 by Myrddin

[karaddin]

59 minutes ago, IFR said:

This goes both ways, though, doesn't it? I don't know about you, but I often see accusations that frame objections to the change of ethnicity as racist in origin. There seems to be a strange unwillingness to acknowledge that, as you said, there are multiple ways to engage the text and it is perfectly valid for someone to not enjoy the changes in ethnicity for purely story related reasons.

It doesn't feel great to be accused of being a racist. And it makes a discussion particularly frustrating when people refuse to engage that you may have a valid position, but rather immediately declare that the true motivation behind your objections are suspect.

Surely it's not controversial to say that racists will object to diversifying a cast which they expected to be all white. Those same racists will also fixate on that point a lot more than someone who is objecting to it for non racist reasons, and it's reasonable to call out that racism as... Well, racism.

The problem comes when the two get conflated which only serves those racists by given them cover to pretend they're actually just principled, and I'll concede that the conflation gets made by both people unhappy with the casting and by those that like it, but I don't think a significant number of people would insist there's just one group. 

So unless you personally are being identified/accused of being racist about it, in which case none of this applies, try to see that criticism as being directed at the behaviour of racist outrage and that this isn't talking about you at all rather than seeing it as calling you out. Essentially if you aren't engaging in the behaviour being criticized, you aren't the subject of the criticism. It comes up in a lot of contexts and it's always a shit show of people mostly arguing past each other

[IFR]

1 hour ago, karaddin said:

Surely it's not controversial to say that racists will object to diversifying a cast which they expected to be all white. Those same racists will also fixate on that point a lot more than someone who is objecting to it for non racist reasons, and it's reasonable to call out that racism as... Well, racism.

Yes, I agree that racism can be a motivation. I think the problem lies in the fact that there's no set notion of what racism is. There are very blatant instances where most everyone can agree that this is indeed racist behavior. But then you encounter gray areas where everyone has a different opinion about what constitutes racism. And so you'll invariably have situations where the party who makes an objection does so with conscious sincerity, but then another party will evaluate the actions as racist, and that will torpedo any chance of a real discussion. 

So I don't think deconvoluting racist motivated objections from non-racist motivated objections is a straightforward process at all, and I think it is largely a matter of personal prejudice and conjecture.

1 hour ago, karaddin said:

The problem comes when the two get conflated which only serves those racists by given them cover to pretend they're actually just principled, and I'll concede that the conflation gets made by both people unhappy with the casting and by those that like it, but I don't think a significant number of people would insist there's just one group.

I agree with this. However, as I mentioned earlier, the deconvolution process is not an easy thing, but I think too many proponents of the show treat it as though it is, and attempt to invalidate what may be a sincere objection by dismissing it as racism. And then that of course creates hostility in the discussion, and any chance at reasonable discourse will rapidly deteriorate.

1 hour ago, karaddin said:

So unless you personally are being identified/accused of being racist about it, in which case none of this applies, try to see that criticism as being directed at the behaviour of racist outrage and that this isn't talking about you at all rather than seeing it as calling you out. Essentially if you aren't engaging in the behaviour being criticized, you aren't the subject of the criticism. It comes up in a lot of contexts and it's always a shit show of people mostly arguing past each other

The problem arises when I don't think I'm behaving in the way that is being criticized, but others believe I am, with varying degrees of sensitivity. There's no objective measure in this, which creates a lot of confusion in the discussion. Some people are very sensitive to the prospect of racist-based arguments, and will perceive any problem with ethnicity alterations as having a high probability of being racist motivated. Others may take a more charitable perspective, and then there's a wide spectrum in between, with all these viewpoints enmeshed in this discussion.

I don't believe when I make my objections that it's racist motivated. I don't think that when others in this thread make these objections that it's racist motivated either. And so invoking the notion that racists can make these objections seems wholly irrelevant for the discourse in this particular thread with these particular posters.

Edited June 23, 2023 by IFR

[JGP]

1 hour ago, IFR said:

The problem arises when I don't think I'm behaving in the way that is being criticized, but others believe I am, with varying degrees of sensitivity. There's no objective measure in this, which creates a lot of confusion in the discussion. Some people are very sensitive to the prospect of racist-based arguments, and will perceive any problem with ethnicity alterations as having a high probability of being racist motivated. Others may take a more charitable perspective, and then there's a wide spectrum in between, with all these viewpoints enmeshed in this discussion.

I don't believe when I make my objections that it's racist motivated. I don't think that when others in this thread make these objections that it's racist motivated either. And so invoking the notion that racists can make these objections seems wholly irrelevant for the discourse in this particular thread with these particular posters.

 

I remember when Iron Fist was being cast. I was fine with a white lead, as I'm generally [though not exclusively] a comics purist. Was it Terra Prime who took me task for it [where the hell is Terra btw, is he all good] Anyway, I cant remember who exactly, but I'd never really considered the white savior trope and racial connotations as historically associated with Danny Rand and K'un-Lun.

Systemic racial bias, whatever, we can all be a little blind to our own issues. Even if largely unintended, it doesn't have to be blatant to be racism.

Edited June 23, 2023 by JGP

[Ran]

Terra moved on from the board and cons at some point, having soured on ASoIaF, I believe, but he's doing well according to his FB posting. 

 

[JGP]

Good. Thanks, Ran.

[Zorral]

Rosamund Pike wasn’t a fan of fantasy. Now she never leaves it.
The actress stars in ‘The Wheel of Time,’ based on the novels by Robert Jordan, and has recorded three of the long series’s audiobooks

https://www.washingtonpost.com/books/2023/06/26/rosamund-pike-dragon-reborn-audiobook-wheel-time-robert-jordan/

Quote

 

When told how long she’s been recording the audiobooks for the “The Wheel of Time,” the fantasy series by Robert Jordan, Rosamund Pike sounded disconcerted.

“You mean so far, with the three I’ve done?” she asked. “It’s 80 hours?” (To be precise, between “The Eye of the World,” “The Great Hunt” and the most recent installment, “The Dragon Reborn,” which has just been released, it’s 87 hours and 23 minutes.) Pike was calling in from Prague, where she and her family moved a few years ago for the production of the television series adapted from Jordan’s books. She is a producer of the series and stars as the magical priestess Moiraine. Over video, what passed over her face, hearing that time estimate, could be called a grimace. “Well — that’s good.” Her eyebrow arched. “Yeah, that’s … nice.” ....

 

 

[grozeng]

On 6/23/2023 at 11:08 AM, IFR said:

For me, the change I disliked the most - and I disliked so many of the changes in the show - is that it is believed that the Dragon prophesied could be a man or a woman. In my mind, this undermines a crucial tension of the series.

People may point out that now that the Dragon Reborn is established as a man, the tension is still in play. But to me, this is a consequential change that would dramatically alter how the public would respond to Rand as the Dragon Reborn. There would be much greater skepticism involved, even when he fulfills the signs of the prophesy, because of course people would like to believe that the savior is going to be someone who won't go mad and literally break the world (that it would be more of the socioeconomic kind of breaking that a woman might bring). And I have full confidence that the writers will not in any way handle this line of reasoning. They almost certainly will ignore it.

I also hate that power progression has already been rendered nonsensical by the end of the first season. Dumai's Well is no longer some exciting point to build up to any longer, because mere novices massacred hundreds of the Dark One's minions already, so who cares about Dumai's Well now? 

And I would be delighted if people repeatedly complained about these poorly calculated changes. But I also think that the ethnicity changes made in this show is comparably stupid to the many other bad changes. So it is nice to see the show regularly castigated for this.

This was exactly my problem.  Not having Rand be the one that saved the day at the end because he was the Dragon Reborn was a change I did not like.  As soon as we finished watching the finale, I told my daughter she needed to read the book because the ending of the book was much better.  To me, that was the one change they should not have done.