Wheel of Time 4: Burning Threads [Book Spoilers]

[fionwe1987]

Comparing Sanderson to the show writers makes no sense, especially because we have the finished product from him, and not from the show.

I was extraordinarily happy with Sanderson's work when The Gathering Storm came out. Every book after showed only why that worked, and that it had less to do with Sanderson than that RJ had written Egwene's arc for that book, so all Sanderson had to do was build Rands arc to parallel this, and that's most of the novel. He didn't try to juggle Perrin and Mat much, and avoided Elayne entirely, so it worked.

The moment he had to juggle them all, the flaws in his writing became readily apparent. And I'd say character interactions in Sanderson's books are worse than the show, in that they either didn't exist when they should, or were badly written, either in terms of the scene direction, or the dialog, which, I can safely say, the show writers are significantly better at than Sanderson, who is just really bad at it, even in his own books, especially if they get longer. He just phones it in, and it feels like the editor has zoinked out by the time they come to chapter 45, and miss that the same word popped up 18 times in 3 pages (only a mild exaggeration: I still remember the nonexistent word "trumped" to refer to the sound of an animal, in Way of Kings. The number of times it trumps as it attacks and retreats from the main characters was enough for me to want to physically hurl the giant book across the room). 

Edited October 10, 2023 by fionwe1987

[IFR]

1 hour ago, fionwe1987 said:

Comparing Sanderson to the show writers makes no sense, especially because we have the finished product from him, and not from the show.

I suppose there's a large chance it will never make sense to compare them, then, because it's unlikely for the show to be completed.

1 hour ago, fionwe1987 said:

I was extraordinarily happy with Sanderson's work when The Gathering Storm came out. Every book after showed only why that worked, and that it had less to do with Sanderson than that RJ had written Egwene's arc for that book, so all Sanderson had to do was build Rands arc to parallel this, and that's most of the novel. He didn't try to juggle Perrin and Mat much, and avoided Elayne entirely, so it worked.

The moment he had to juggle them all, the flaws in his writing became readily apparent. And I'd say character interactions in Sanderson's books are worse than the show, in that they either didn't exist when they should, or were badly written, either in terms of the scene direction, or the dialog, which, I can safely say, the show writers are significantly better at than Sanderson, who is just really bad at it, even in his own books, especially if they get longer. He just phones it in, and it feels like the editor has zoinked out by the time they come to chapter 45, and miss that the same word popped up 18 times in 3 pages (only a mild exaggeration: I still remember the nonexistent word "trumped" to refer to the sound of an animal, in Way of Kings. The number of times it trumps as it attacks and retreats from the main characters was enough for me to want to physically hurl the giant book across the room).

Since this is so subjective, I doubt we'll see eye to eye on this, but I can safely say I strongly disagree with your take. I would say that Forsaken and Elayne aside, the show very rarely produces any good character interactions. I agree with you that Sanderson had a problem with this too, but I think he found far more success than the show. 

Furthermore, he managed to create some legitimately good scenes. Rand touching the True Power, Rand curing his madness at the end, and Egwene and the White Tower, and later its cleansing, and some moments with Perrin. I also enjoyed all of Zen Rand. I thought Sanderson did a pretty good job writing the death of Egwene, and there were parts of the Last Battle I thought were decent too. There were several good moments in Sanderson's efforts.

The show has not managed to produce a single good scene. I think there are a few serviceable scenes, but nothing I would call good.

The charming interactions in the Two Rivers? The show botched that. Whitebridge? Botched. Perrin and Egwene's capture by the Whitecloaks? Botched. Caemlyn? Botched. The Ways? Botched. Tarwin's Gap?  The Hunt for the Horn? Botched. Rand tracking and then reclaiming the Horn? Botched. Rand's time in Cairhein and Daes Damar? Botched. The journey to Falme? Botched. Nynaeve's Accepted trial? Botched. Aviendha and the Aiel? Botched. Egwene's training as a damane? Pretty good, but later retroactively botched as it was rendered nonsensical at the end. The entire Falme sequence? 

This is not to mentioned the additions in the show that turned out very poorly (Lan and Moiraine, the Warder society in general, Rand in the asylum, Mat and Darkfriend Min, etc.).

Sanderson had some notes from Jordan, and completed passages to work off of. The writers of the show had the actual books.

I think it's very safe to say that Sanderson proved himself much better than they.

Edited October 10, 2023 by IFR

[David Selig]

Some fans online wanted Sanderson to be a screenwriter in the show but I've always thought this was absurd. He would be a horrendous screenwriter, his dialogue is without exaggeration the worst I've read in a professionally published author. And he'd be especially bad for a show with only 8 episodes per season because he has used tow rite only doorstoppers full of bloat.

14 minutes ago, IFR said:

The show has not managed to produce a single good scene.

It's hard to take your posts seriously when you say stuff like this one.

[IFR]

2 minutes ago, David Selig said:

It's hard to take your posts seriously when you say stuff like this one.

Because we have different opinions? There is no objective measure in this, I can only speak for my view of the show and you can only speak for your view.

Why don't you tell me a good moment in the show and I will tell you why I think it's not a good moment? That's the extent of objectivity we can achieve, where our difference in opinions may be analysed.

[fionwe1987]

35 minutes ago, IFR said:

Because we have different opinions?

No, because you provide totalizing, maximalist opinions that no interpretation of the words you use make the kind of statements that foster useful discussion.

I know we aren't doing science here, and every position has no concept of falsifiability, but if you submit your subjective opinion as "everything sucks, and everything can only suck, and it won't last long anyway, because it sucks"... Well, you have every right to it, but it is not a serious opinion that can be engaged with to any length of time. 

35 minutes ago, IFR said:

There is no objective measure in this, I can only speak for my view of the show and you can only speak for your view.

But you're hardly just giving your subjective opinion of the show. You're making broad statements and claims, making predictions, as well as conclusions about the supposed political leanings of various aspects of the show. You're allowed to state your views, but surely, we are allowed to call them out in various ways? Yes, all our opinions are subjective, but that doesn't make them equal, especially not in the scrutiny of long conversation. After a while, people can see the pattern in the someones responses, and we're absolutely allowed to call out those patterns, and make decisions on how to interact with you. This is hardly the first time you've shared your opinions on the show. 

35 minutes ago, IFR said:

Why don't you tell me a good moment in the show and I will tell you why I think it's not a good moment? That's the extent of objectivity we can achieve, where our difference in opinions may be analysed.

So you're saying all discussion of art is doomed to mere subjective back and forth, and that analysis and critique that has greater value than subjective opinion cannot be arrived at in conversation?

That view is probably why this conversation isn't working for me. Your goals seems to be to repeatedly assure us that whatever our views of the show, a much more critical one exists, and to voice it.

Others of us are trying to critique the show, discussing improvements that can happen, realisticly aware that hardly any of our complaints will translate to any change, but by sharing our perspectives, aspects of the show we missed might get better explained, and enhance our liking for the show. As someone who refused to watch the finale of the first season and wrote off the show, I'd credit the discussion here in reawakening my interest in the show, and 8 episodes later, I'm glad I gave it a second chance. I wish the show continued success and continued improvement, rather than constantly assert that it is doomed, and then insist this is somehow a subjective opinion.

You've made it clear that because of the perceived political choices made by the showrunners, this show isn't for you. You are certain, because there's of course no evidence of these leanings changing, that the show is doomed. 

Well, how many times do you need to tell us that?

 

Edited October 10, 2023 by fionwe1987

[Arakasi]

Can you just go to a forum that shares your points on the series instead of constantly derailing this one where we actually enjoy it? I’m close to putting you on ignore but since so many posts are just responding to you it would be very disjointed.

Edited October 10, 2023 by Arakasi

[IFR]

42 minutes ago, fionwe1987 said:

No, because you provide totalizing, maximalist opinions that no interpretation of the words you use make the kind of statements that foster useful discussion.

I know we aren't doing science here, and every position has no concept of falsifiability, but if you submit your subjective opinion as "everything sucks, and everything can only suck, and it won't last long anyway, because it sucks"... Well, you have every right to it, but it is not a serious opinion that can be engaged with to any length of time. 

Do you think the speculation that this show won't be completed is unreasonable?

Just because it's conjecture that is "totalizing" etc., does not make it one that is impossible to engage. Viewership is down from season 1 to season 2, by about 55%. I'll try to pull up the source for that later if you wish. There's a very real uncertainty on whether the show will be completed. I think remarking on that is fair.

I've allowed that not everything sucks - some things are serviceable, so you are exaggerating my position.

In our discussion of Sanderson versus the show writers, you were of the opinion that Sanderson was inferior to the writers of the show, expressed your reasons, and then I disagreed, and addressed why I disagreed with your reasoning. This is not beyond discussion at all. If you dispute that the scenes in Sanderson's books that I mentioned are good, that is something we can discuss. If you think that there are good moments in the show, that is also something we can discuss. Perhaps we won't arrive to any agreement. Perhaps we will. I have changed my perspective due to discussions on this board several times before, it simply hasn't yet happened regarding this show for the most part because I do not find the opinions presented thus far particularly persuasive.

I gather none of the opinions I've presented to you have been persuasive either. I'm not going to accuse you of being beyond reason though.

42 minutes ago, fionwe1987 said:

But you're hardly just giving your subjective opinion of the show. You're making broad statements and claims, making predictions, as well as conclusions about the supposed political leanings of various aspects of the show. You're allowed to state your views, but surely, we are allowed to call them out in various ways?

Sure, and I'm allowed to call out what is being called out. That is the nature of a discussion. A back and forth. You may be frustrated because you disagree with what I have to say despite what you believe is a strong case. You may even be fortified because there are more people here who enjoy this show who are more strongly inclined to agree with you.

But I'm not persuaded by popularity, and I consider things on their own merit. And thus far much of the disagreements that have been expressed are not particularly compelling to me (and I point out why). I am more than happy to change my position if I do find an opinion that I consider compelling.

Predictions, conejcture, and impressions are simply the nature of discussing an ongoing work of art. You make yours, and I make mine.

42 minutes ago, fionwe1987 said:

So you're saying all discussion of art is doomed to mere subjective back and forth, and that analysis and critique that has greater value than subjective opinion cannot be arrived at in conversation?

Well, would you say your own opinions on quality, predictions and conjectures are objective?

I can tell you an objective statement I've made. According to Nielson data, the show has lower viewership than when it began.

42 minutes ago, fionwe1987 said:

That view is probably why this conversation isn't working for me. Your goals seems to be to repeatedly assure us that whatever our views of the show, a much more critical one exists, and to voice it.

I'm simply expressing my opinions about a show in a thread dedicated to this show. You are doing the same. It's true, my views are less popular than your views, but yes, these are entirely subjective matters.

42 minutes ago, fionwe1987 said:

Others of us are trying to critique the show, discussing improvements that can happen, realisticly aware that hardly any of our complaints will translate to any change, but by sharing our perspectives, aspects of the show we missed might get better explained, and enhance our liking for the show. 

You're using a show discussion thread as a venue for entertainment, right? I likewise am. My tone is more negative than yours, which may harm the enjoyment for the discussion for you. You have not perhaps considered that your more positive tone might harm the discussion for me, I suppose? (It doesn't, but I'm willing to wager that you haven't considered this or particularly care if it does, and are unwilling to be more negative about the show to improve my experience? Correct me if I'm wrong.)

42 minutes ago, Arakasi said:

Can you just go to a forum that shares your points on the series instead of constantly derailing this one where we actually enjoy it? I’m close to putting you on ignore but since so many posts are just responding to you it would be very disjointed.

I sincerely am sorry that you are not having fun. If it is any consolation, this is the perfect confluence of a show I enjoy mocking becoming available and the brief moment I procrastinate before I have an enormous, exhausting project to deal with, which will consume my time. So I won't be in this discussion for a great deal longer.

I do suggest you check out the subreddit of WoTshow. They brook basically no cirticism of the show and it's virtually unadulterated positivity over there. You may really enjoy it!

Edited October 10, 2023 by IFR

[karaddin]

I think one of the main points for me is that you think the writing is bad and the writers are terrible - I'm aware of it and I'm certainly not going to forget it even without reminders. It doesn't need the repetition to know that's where you stand and it doesn't really add anything more to have it reiterated.

You watched season 1 and much like many people here you didn't enjoy it. That's a disappointing outcome for you and for the show runners, but it happens. As a result of that you drew the above conclusions and it really seems to me like that so heavily colored your viewing of season 2 that you watched it with it pre-judged and funnily enough found that your opinion matched the pre-judgement. There's not actually an enjoyable or useful discussion to be had when that's the fundamental basis of the critique.

Obviously I'm one of the posters most positive about the show, so I don't expect my positive view of the season to be particularly convincing to you. However quite a few of the posters that had a much more positive view of season 2 (compared to season 1) still seemed to be trying to find things to dislike in the finale so I don't think the change in their reception for this season should be dismissed in the same fashion that I accept mine would be. Hell it's easy to see the difference - I still think the entire Warder plot line going back to Stepin in season 1 was well done, enjoyable and engaging in efficient set up work that will be paying off for seasons - they all still hate that in both seasons. But contrast the portrayal of Ishy and Lanfear is just excellent, I haven't seen anyone that hasn't enjoyed that who sounds like they gave this season a chance.

Moving on from belabouring that point... There was plenty about the Sanderson books that didn't work for me, but I think at the end of the day they're as good as we could have gotten from an author willing to do their best at finishing another authors story in a style approximating theirs. I think Sanderson was extremely wary of addressing any major event/resolution which didn't have clear planning from Jordan left for him to follow, which left a lot of threads left dangling or given a very hasty bare bones conclusion but at the end of the day this reluctance was probably the right call and attempting to fill that in himself would have landed even worse. This probably plays into not getting some of those things fionwe really felt were missing - too significant to tackle on his own, not significant enough to have notes left. Excessive pages after pages of the last battle was safer to write even if he wasn't as good at that.

[karaddin]

@IFR

Quote

Do you think the speculation that this show won't be completed is unreasonable?

Of course that's reasonable, I'd even agree it's unfortunately likely to be true simply due to the nature of the television industry. Going a step further and suggesting that it's only because the writers suck and maybe a side order of virtue signaling but has nothing to do with industry trends, the expense of filming etc really doesn't come across as good faith however.

Quote

I do suggest you check out the subreddit of WoTshow. They brook basically no cirticism of the show and it's virtually unadulterated positivity over there. You may really enjoy it!

The claim that they allow no critique at all is about as good faith as the previous bit, but it's definitely got a positive slant to it - and I have enjoyed a lot of the threads that I've read there, so snark aside it's a good recommendation for others.

[Gertrude]

7 hours ago, Gaston de Foix said:

So...I've been reading "AMOL" again and the writing leaves much to be desired. 

I was never reading the books for the brilliant writing. Jordan was a decent writer, but nothing special IMO. Sanderson is fine. I don't prefer the simplistic style, I think Sanderson refers to it as 'window pane' or something. He doesn't like the writing to get in the way of the story. Simplistic is not the same as bad, it's just not my preference. I started reading WoT at a time when Jordan's style was pretty standard and it didn't bother me, which is about all I can say about it. It was always about the story - which is why I stuck it out through the slog and beyond.

4 hours ago, David Selig said:

he (or his Amazon bosses) probably thought Book Lan is a a pretty boring character who needed major changes to be interesting to the tv audience.

And Lan IS an incredibly boring character. I know a lot of people are very attached to him and he resonates with them. That's cool, but he was always just a sidekick and afterthought in my mind. The only interesting thing about him was his ride through the Borderlands, and that was mainly because Nyneave set him up.

Lan did need to be fleshed out and made into a character we could get to know and care about. We mostly see him through the eyes of people he's not close to, so of course he's not going to open up in teh books. We almost never see him and Moiraine or him and Nyneave alone together. Lan was the ultimate blank slate with a few adornments draped over him like like 'stoic' and 'bad ass'. That worked for a lot of people, but I was not a fan.

[IFR]

6 minutes ago, karaddin said:

Of course that's reasonable, I'd even agree it's unfortunately likely to be true simply due to the nature of the television industry. Going a step further and suggesting that it's only because the writers suck and maybe a side order of virtue signaling but has nothing to do with industry trends, the expense of filming etc really doesn't come across as good faith however.

I'm glad you brought this up, so I can address your objection.

When I made this statement:

"I suppose there's a large chance it will never make sense to compare them, then, because it's unlikely for the show to be completed."

I intended it as a joke purely of the longevity of the show in reference to comparing two properties, not some indictment in itself of the quality of the show. I do like to believe that it has a decreasing viewership because the audience agrees with me that the show is abysmal, but that was not intended as part of the statement.

I don't think it's possible to make any objective statement without those reading it doing so through the filter of what they know my opinions of the show to be.

But it was simply a joke. My follow up on the decline in numbers was brought up in good faith, to substantiate my expressed disagreement to the passage I quoted. Again, while I do view the show as bad, the statement itself contained content only on viewership, not my opinions on why viewership changed as it did.

The follow up statement:

"I've allowed that not everything sucks - some things are serviceable, so you are exaggerating my position."

Was intended to address a separate point in the quoted passage.

14 minutes ago, karaddin said:

The claim that they allow no critique at all is about as good faith as the previous bit, but it's definitely got a positive slant to it - and I have enjoyed a lot of the threads that I've read there, so snark aside it's a good recommendation for others.

You may be right. I only have my own experience with that subreddit, and it is as I've said. I certainly don't have a problem with people enjoying the show (as I've said many times before - you say I repeat some things often, but then often people do not register that which I repeat).

So it certainly was a recommendation in good faith. And I really do hope Araski enjoys it!

[fionwe1987]

34 minutes ago, IFR said:

If it is any consolation, this is the perfect confluence of a show I enjoy mocking becoming available and the brief moment I procrastinate before I have an enormous, exhausting project to deal with, which will consume my time. So I won't be in this discussion for a great deal longer.

And this is why your opinions aren't worth engaging with. Mockery is mockery, and after a while, it gets boring. It does take some gall to both claim this is entertaining procrastination, mockery AND deserves to be given due respect as a subjective opinion. I'm rooting for that project to give us deliverance. 

34 minutes ago, IFR said:

 

 

29 minutes ago, karaddin said:

Moving on from belabouring that point... There was plenty about the Sanderson books that didn't work for me, but I think at the end of the day they're as good as we could have gotten from an author willing to do their best at finishing another authors story in a style approximating theirs. I think Sanderson was extremely wary of addressing any major event/resolution which didn't have clear planning from Jordan left for him to follow, which left a lot of threads left dangling or given a very hasty bare bones conclusion but at the end of the day this reluctance was probably the right call and attempting to fill that in himself would have landed even worse. This probably plays into not getting some of those things fionwe really felt were missing - too significant to tackle on his own, not significant enough to have notes left. Excessive pages after pages of the last battle was safer to write even if he wasn't as good at that.

See if that was why the last 3 books are the way they are, then I'd say Sanderson was the wrong guy for the job. RJ didn't leave notes for plenty of things, and an author completing the series can then only use their own sense of the world and characters. And Sanderson did that, by the way. It isn't like he strictly only wrote those parts that had notes. He went so far as to invent a character who had a major role at the ending.

Completing someone else's work is hard, and often thankless. But failure is ensured if you refuse to take up complicated threads due to the lack of  guidance from the original author. Whether RJ himself would have done any different or better is a legitimate, if ultimately unanswerable question, but if we're judging Sanderson for how he wrapped the series up, his decision to not touch some complex plot threads and choose the safer but mind numbing route of many many interminable battles... I wouldn't call that the right call. A safe call, but not right. 

Btw: I should note this is hardly all just on Sanderson. He's the author, but I'd say his editorial team and team Jordan are all part of my critique here. I'm glad they did it, and thankful for it, but I came out of it feeling it didn't address the best parts of the books, and the some major hanging plot threads, and spent its focus very weirdly. 

Edited October 10, 2023 by fionwe1987

[IFR]

2 minutes ago, fionwe1987 said:

And this is why your opinions aren't worth engaging with. Mockery is mockery, and after a while, it gets boring. It does take some gall to both claim this is entertaining procrastination, mockery AND deserves to be given due respect as a subjective opinion. I'm rooting for that project to give us deliverance. 

I've made it clear from very early on how I engage with the show itself.

I've also made clear how I engage with other people: with civility and respect. I think you're fully entitled to your opinions and I enjoy reading them. I think it's fine to mock a show. I think it's unacceptable to mock a person.

Whatever you feel about me mocking the show itself, be assured that I absolutely am not and will not mock you. I may disagree with you, I may occasionally regard certain opinions as extreme and absurd (as you no doubt hold of me), but I do respect you and everyone here. Believe it or not. And that's another objective statement.

You do not have to engage with me, by the way. I understand how appealing an echo chamber is. The temptation to remove yourself from the unpleasantness of opinions you highly disagree with, that you cannot seem to change despite believing utterly how right you are and how wrong they are.

I simply state my opinion here, like everyone else.

[karaddin]

By "the right call" I meant from a commercial perspective, not an artistic one, and really should have made that clear as it's a very different claim. I think the number of people that would have been upset about things they felt were changed or wrong would have had a greater impact than the number of people that felt the books were underwhelming/unsatisfying.

And I'm sure there are other authors that could have done a better job, I'm just pretty skeptical that any of those authors would have also been willing to do the job - not just because of the risk of fan backlash, but also because it means putting their own projects on hold and working under an editor that was extremely close to the material.

They're flawed books written under unfortunate circumstances by an author that absolutely cared about the material and was under a lot of pressure. I'm grateful that they exist to give us the closure that we got, even though I wish Jordan got to finish them himself. Going without aMoL would be one thing, but not having gotten even TGS would have been terrible.

[fionwe1987]

8 minutes ago, karaddin said:

By "the right call" I meant from a commercial perspective, not an artistic one, and really should have made that clear as it's a very different claim.I think the number of people that would have been upset about things they felt were changed or wrong would have had a greater impact than the number of people that felt the books were underwhelming/unsatisfying.

Sure, but I didn't think we were critiquing Sanderson's writing from a commercial sense. He's clearly a very commercially successful writer, and has had business sense to capitalize on his success in new and interesting ways. That makes Sanderson a good businessman. 

8 minutes ago, karaddin said:

And I'm sure there are other authors that could have done a better job, I'm just pretty skeptical that any of those authors would have also been willing to do the job - not just because of the risk of fan backlash, but also because it means putting their own projects on hold and working under an editor that was extremely close to the material.

I don't think any big name author made sense, other than commercially. 

8 minutes ago, karaddin said:

They're flawed books written under unfortunate circumstances by an author that absolutely cared about the material and was under a lot of pressure. I'm grateful that they exist to give us the closure that we got, even though I wish Jordan got to finish them himself. Going without aMoL would be one thing, but not having gotten even TGS would have been terrible.

This I agree with. Sanderson's work isn't so bad that it would have been better for the series to be left unfinished (which is absolutely true of other such cases). 

On Lan: I agree he isn't a great character. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that among the main and secondary characters he's the worst developed and written male character. He's much more engaging in New Spring, but that Lan is also a lot more emotional and wishy washy. So Lan needed fleshing out.

I just think the better direction to do that is to focus on Malkier and his sense of gloom because of its fall, and how that shapes him, because that is what makes him interesting in the books, to the extent he's interesting. Maybe they'll do this in later seasons. 

I didn't have a problem with Lan crying at Steppin's funeral, though. I'm still baffled at that. It seems to come from some yearning for a "manly man" character that is particularly unfitting for this series, because that kind of definitions of manliness is soundly mocked in the series. 

Edited October 10, 2023 by fionwe1987

[karaddin]

3 minutes ago, fionwe1987 said:

Sure, but I didn't think we were critiquing Sanderson's writing from a commercial sense. 

Perhaps not. I was interpreting the conversation along the lines of "it should have been someone else" rather than "they would have been better if he'd done x". I wasn't really caring about the commercial angle on its own but using that as the short hand for "acceptable to the broadest range of readers" but even that's a misunderstanding of the conversation on my part.

[IFR]

1 hour ago, fionwe1987 said:

You've made it clear that because of the perceived political choices made by the showrunners, this show isn't for you. You are certain, because there's of course no evidence of these leanings changing, that the show is doomed.

I just saw this update.

This is of course a blatant mischaracterization of my position. And I mean really far off the mark.

You complain about me being repetitious, yet you seem not to know the position of the person you debate.

I think I can fairly characterize your position on the show.

Can you give a fair characterization of mine?

Edited October 11, 2023 by IFR

[fionwe1987]

Yeah I don't know that if "someone else" was another established author, it would work. In the right hands, it could, though. And this is especially true of the Seanchan, because, while this is, yes, my subjective interpretation, I also feel it's consistent with the books that there was a solution there based on RJ's writing (because even if he didn't leave notes, he certainly left a ton of Prophesies and viewings and the like). Here's how I think it could have played out:

We know a big blow up between Rand and Egwene had to happen, and we know RJ planned for Moiraine's return to diffuse the situation.

We also know the structure of the actual conflict between them was mostly Sanderson. He's said this in the interviews, and you can see it in how Tower's of Midnight is structured, and the confusing jumble of positions Rand and Egwene take. Oh, the seals shouldn't be broken at all. No they should be broken on the first day of battle. No, it's actually about Rand manipulating Egwene. No it's about Rand deciding to kill the Dark One. 

The simple and obvious solution that allows for both this thread to be dealt with well, and the Seanchan, is to make the Seanchan the source of conflict. Rand, based on his memories, is hardly wrong that the Light cannot afford a two-front war. Egwene, based on her personal experience, and her rock solid opposition to any kind of compulsion in the books, and the recent Seanchan raid, has a valid case that working with the Seanchan as is makes no sense, either, morally or tactically. 

We also know from Egwene's own dreams that she eventually has to work with the Seanchan. And every other ruler and major character has their own views on the Seanchan, on both sides of this. Perrin's already worked with them, and Mat is marrying in, but also was responsible for the escape of all the Sea Folk Windfinders.

Conflict, character placement, and relatively open-ended hints to possible resolution were available to address the Seanchan in greater depth. And an aMoL that spent time dealing with this conflict, over the many interminable and boring battles, would have been a better one. More, it would have been true to the characters. I was totally unconvinced by Egwene's bellyflop on this issue. Ditto Nynaeve, ditto pretty much everyone. 

Edited October 11, 2023 by fionwe1987

[karaddin]

No argument on those ideas. Given a lot of readers already found Egwene very annoying she really could have used her conflict with Rand coming from a stance we actually agree with (or at the very least are highly sympathetic to) AND the Seanchan resolution was just the worst part of how it all wrapped up. I'm not sure how much of what I dislike there came down to Sanderson vs Jordans notes, but I know the Mat/Tuon sequel series ideas probably influence it a lot so I'm guessing the answer there is 'both'.

[Slurktan]

2 hours ago, fionwe1987 said:

The simple and obvious solution that allows for both this thread to be dealt with well, and the Seanchan, is to make the Seanchan the source of conflict. Rand, based on his memories, is hardly wrong that the Light cannot afford a two-front war. Egwene, based on her personal experience, and her rock solid opposition to any kind of compulsion in the books, and the recent Seanchan raid, has a valid case that working with the Seanchan as is makes no sense, either, morally or tactically. 

We also know from Egwene's own dreams that she eventually has to work with the Seanchan. And every other ruler and major character has their own views on the Seanchan, on both sides of this. Perrin's already worked with them, and Mat is marrying in, but also was responsible for the escape of all the Sea Folk Windfinders.

Conflict, character placement, and relatively open-ended hints to possible resolution were available to address the Seanchan in greater depth. And an aMoL that spent time dealing with this conflict, over the many interminable and boring battles, would have been a better one. More, it would have been true to the characters. I was totally unconvinced by Egwene's bellyflop on this issue. Ditto Nynaeve, ditto pretty much everyone. 

Rand also had his personal experience with the Seanchan and it wasn't bad, quite the opposite.

I don't see the problem with a lack of "resolution" with the Seanchan.  There needn't be even if Jordan wasn't going to write Mat + Tuon.  Things don't have to be wrapped up in a nice tidy bow.  We know the slavery in Seanchan is bad.  We know how they treat the common people is significantly better than everyone else.  We know (from Sanderson granted) that should push come to shove they would conquer the world despite the world knowing their dirty secret.  We also know that they wouldn't have tried conquering the world if the Aiel weren't bored.

None of it really matters. If the Dark One broke out in say 1710 and the world was on the edge of being destroyed and the only way China and France and Japan etc could win and survive was to temporarily ally with the dirty slaving British you think they wouldn't have lol?  Egwene's position even based on her personal history is actually remarkably short sighted and stupid, thankfully in the books she realizes her error.