Souran Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Like everything else that becomes well known in its area and represents what Fantasy was in the late part of the 20th century WOT has a lot of both popular support and detractors.The most honest assement anybody could give another person about WOT is: you have to try it and see if you like it.Trying to compare ASOIAF and WOT is sort of like comparing Star Trek to Star Wars. They are both in the same genre. There are people who love one and hate the other. However, they really have very little to do with each other in terms of themes, backgrounds, and source material.Star Trek got the very best in hard/classic sci fi writers to write or at least contribute to many of its episodes. They had a group of guys whose job it was to come up with plausible science for how the stuff seen works.Star Wars was built on mythology, Lucas says that the chief elements were taken from "a hero with a thousand faces." The story really could be transplanted to basically any background setting (as terry goodkind proved in wizards first rule). The chief complaints of star wars are that it is derivative (which it is). The chief complaint of star trek is that its overly technical (which it is)Now, if you look WOT is like starwars. The study that went into making those novels was in classical storytelling and myth. If you go and look at reputible works on mythology you can find that irish and celtic mythology and eastern philosphy and mythology have been pretty well incorporated into the narrative.On the other hand, ASOIAF has the historical novel as its basis and if GRRM didn't read up on the war of the roses, the time of the 5 emperors, the romance of the 3 kingdoms, and the warring states period before writting his work then he must have at least had an understanding of their events.The honest assement of WOT for a ASOIAF reader would be that you will like it if want something that is similar in scope to ASOIAF but that plays with a different set of ideas.Its less grit, but more charm, fewer elements that you would find in a midevil history text book but more elements you would find in your midevil literature. As a comparison of writting style I woud say comparing the two is like comparing Robert E. Howard to Tolkien. GRRM writes with Howards intensity. Jordan wrote with tolkiens panoramic detail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.