Towers of Midnight

[Renasko]

Exactly. Because Goodkind is a genre great. He sells well, after all.

I'm not trying to say anything bad about Jordan, here, just saying that that's a terrible argument.

Well, I disagree, but what does it matter? He's certainly not incompetent. I find it ridiculous that that was even suggested, but seeing as how Humble Asskicker is still trudging through with PoD's, I guess I shouldn't be all that surprised.

Someone said that? Interesting, as that should have warranted an instant post deletion and a warning. Perhaps this thread requires closer moderation.

Indeed they did. It was well over a year ago, though. I complained at the time, as I found the comment quite hurtful, but guess who's post got deleted.

Anyways, despite being a big fan of this series, I didn't quite feel the chapters Tor has made available from ToM. Perhaps once it's within the greater narrative, I'll dig it.

ETA: Not sure whether or not it was Humble Asskicker that said the comment concerning RJ's death.

[Gertrude]

One day, readers will eventually understand that editors don't have unchallengeable authority over a book and there is a limit on what they can ask the author to do and not do. If a book sucks, the primary fault always lies with the author.

I do actually get that, but ...

An editor who wasn't married to him was what he needed the most, I think. . .

is more what I was trying to get at. I think this turned out to be a horribly self-indulgent pairing.

[Liadin]

is more what I was trying to get at. I think this turned out to be a horribly self-indulgent pairing.

Agree. I think the likely problem is that they were too similar: they shared a sense of humor, fetishes, etc., and so when his own obsessions started to take over the work, she was on exactly the same page he was and encouraged habits she should have stamped out. Of course, whether any editor would have been able to discipline him once the books were on the NYT bestseller lists is an open question. But somebody who was closely involved in the project telling him, "This isn't funny, actually it's annoying as hell" on a regular basis would have helped IMO.

At any rate, I don't think it's true to say that Sanderson's a better writer than RJ and Jordan should have just done the outlining. Sanderson has a stronger plot-focus than Jordan, which is what the series needed, and he severely cut back Jordan's bizarre obsessions. And he did maybe a slightly better job with the female characters (mostly by cutting out skirt-smoothing etc.). But Jordan was still a much more mature writer, best prose stylist and so on. If he hadn't been too arrogant to read reader reviews and take fan reactions into consideration, there's no question he'd have written the better ending. As is.... who knows, Jordan did seem to be getting more focus in KoD.

[Shryke]

He did listen to fan reactions. KoD's structure is a direct result of fan complaints about CoT. Which is, in some ways, a direct result of complaints about PoD and WH sidelining or leaving characters out.

[Liadin]

He did listen to fan reactions. KoD's structure is a direct result of fan complaints about CoT. Which is, in some ways, a direct result of complaints about PoD and WH sidelining or leaving characters out.

"Fans" may have been the wrong word there. Jordan's famous on Amazon for having said (in response to a question about whether he read reviews there): "If you need your heart checked out, do you go to a surgeon or some guy on the street?" So, maybe he paid attention to people who were already diehard fans (or professional reviewers) but he didn't care about the general reader reaction to his books. Presuming here that not all readers are fans; I post about Jordan on the Internet but I never saw it as my business to contact him personally. Sanderson is much more receptive to the general complaints about his work, and he's aware of the views of bloggers who aren't necessarily fans, for instance.

[Gertrude]

At any rate, I don't think it's true to say that Sanderson's a better writer than RJ and Jordan should have just done the outlining.

I didn't mean to imply that Jordan was a bad writer, just that his ideas were awesome, but his execution was poor. OK, so saying it would have been better if he'd only been behind the scenes is probably a little much, but I was thinking along the lines that that another set of eyes would have helped focus it and polished it up. As an example, I do love the world building he does, but only in broad strokes. Saidar/Saidin and how it works, how it shaped the world is brilliant. Tel'aran'rhiod is an interesting idea. I like the exoticism of the Seanchan and the Sea Folk and the eluded to Sharrans, but the different cultures that start and end at national borders is very shallow. All Cairhienen are short. The Ebou Dari have olive skin and like knives. Stuff like that and the relatively simple politics, the flatness of the characters, the incompetence of most of the forsaken - it keeps it from being as great as I think it could have been.

Even things that annoy me that I know were on purpose (keeping secrets, the gender attitudes, revealing the Aes Sedai to be less than their legend) could have been written much more effectively (i.e. not making me want to tear out my hair) while still keeping those themes intact.

[Cantabile]

I think one has to approach WoT with a certain mindset to enjoy it. If you go in expecting psychologically deep characterization, sociological realism, brilliant dialogue, streamlined plot, and literary substance, then you're going to be disappointed. WoT is meant to be enjoyed as entertainment, for the fantastical adventures, and the bliss of losing oneself in another world.

And there's nothing wrong with that. Light entertainment has an equally valid role in literary as anything else, but you gotta take it for what it is.

[Gertrude]

Hey, I'm still reading and enjoying it :)

[fionwe1987]

the relatively simple politics

This is one thing where I don't even get where people are coming from. Sure, some of the politics get mired in the really slow plot movement of books 8-10, but what's even in those books is pretty excellent. Nothing is convoluted for the sake of being convoluted, but nor is it so straightforward that you're yawning at the mysteries and the intrigue. RJ's politics in general relied on small bits adding up, and many a time ended up in final reveals that were extremely surprising. At other times, we a readers expected something as complex as the best, and ended up with something that wasn't as convoluted, so it is somewhat disappointing. But "relatively simple politics" just doesn't seem like the same series for me. I can think of few other fantasies where politics is better done.

I think one has to approach WoT with a certain mindset to enjoy it. If you go in expecting psychologically deep characterization, sociological realism, brilliant dialogue, streamlined plot, and literary substance, then you're going to be disappointed. WoT is meant to be enjoyed as entertainment, for the fantastical adventures, and the bliss of losing oneself in another world.

And there's nothing wrong with that. Light entertainment has an equally valid role in literary as anything else, but you gotta take it for what it is.

From a mind that was clearly too simple :P, since it found WoT to have some substance, I disagree, for what its worth.

I think when it comes to thematic depth, especially, Jordan just succeeded way more than people like Erikson, who seem to think complex=better, and ultimately fail in having a thematically integrated set of novels.

Some of his themes may be annoying, but for the most part, issues like the weight of leadership, the way information flows and causes unexpected results, knowledge and its uses/perils etc. are handled very well, with not that many instances of browbeating the readers with the "moral of the story", and superbly integrated with multiple story lines.

[fionwe1987]

"Fans" may have been the wrong word there. Jordan's famous on Amazon for having said (in response to a question about whether he read reviews there): "If you need your heart checked out, do you go to a surgeon or some guy on the street?" So, maybe he paid attention to people who were already diehard fans (or professional reviewers) but he didn't care about the general reader reaction to his books. Presuming here that not all readers are fans; I post about Jordan on the Internet but I never saw it as my business to contact him personally. Sanderson is much more receptive to the general complaints about his work, and he's aware of the views of bloggers who aren't necessarily fans, for instance.

Hmmm... but are Amazon reviews really worth paying attention to? Most of them are provably absurd, though there are the rare insightful ones too. On the whole, I think an author who allows those reviews to dictate what he writes is heading for serious trouble.

After all, I think even Sanderson would be well advised to ignore the initial reviews of "The Way of Kings". :laugh:

[Shryke]

"Fans" may have been the wrong word there. Jordan's famous on Amazon for having said (in response to a question about whether he read reviews there): "If you need your heart checked out, do you go to a surgeon or some guy on the street?" So, maybe he paid attention to people who were already diehard fans (or professional reviewers) but he didn't care about the general reader reaction to his books. Presuming here that not all readers are fans; I post about Jordan on the Internet but I never saw it as my business to contact him personally. Sanderson is much more receptive to the general complaints about his work, and he's aware of the views of bloggers who aren't necessarily fans, for instance.

Ok, so what does he have to do to meet your illusory "Fan Listening Stamp of Approval"?

[Liadin]

Hmmm... but are Amazon reviews really worth paying attention to? Most of them are provably absurd, though there are the rare insightful ones too. On the whole, I think an author who allows those reviews to dictate what he writes is heading for serious trouble.

Amazon reviews are merely a way of seeing what the general readership thinks of a book (in cases where there are enough reviews to give you a fair idea; all the WoT books have hundreds). Most are not absurd by any means; some are, but the vast majority are legit (and for books 8-10 at least of WoT, far more entertaining than the books). Alternatively, an author could visit forums like this one where readers make intelligent criticisms of books. Or they could read bloggers.

I'm not suggesting that everyone do this by any means; some authors are new, little-discussed and hearing uncensored criticism of their books would hurt more than it would help. Plenty of authors don't read any reviews of their books, and that's legitimate, particularly if so little is said about the books at all that they're likely to blow one person's obscure complaint out of proportion. But Jordan produced several books running that all had the same problems, which were well-articulated in the reviews, on forums, etc., and which he chose to ignore--thus leading to the next book having the exact same problems. Meanwhile, he acted like a dick about it.

I didn't mean to imply that Jordan was a bad writer, just that his ideas were awesome, but his execution was poor. OK, so saying it would have been better if he'd only been behind the scenes is probably a little much, but I was thinking along the lines that that another set of eyes would have helped focus it and polished it up. As an example, I do love the world building he does, but only in broad strokes. Saidar/Saidin and how it works, how it shaped the world is brilliant. Tel'aran'rhiod is an interesting idea. I like the exoticism of the Seanchan and the Sea Folk and the eluded to Sharrans, but the different cultures that start and end at national borders is very shallow. All Cairhienen are short. The Ebou Dari have olive skin and like knives. Stuff like that and the relatively simple politics, the flatness of the characters, the incompetence of most of the forsaken - it keeps it from being as great as I think it could have been.

So I agree with this, but I don't see Sanderson improving it so far either. The areas where he has improved the series--say, staying in track plotwise--are areas where Jordan could have done it himself (based on what he did with the early books) but chose not to.

[fionwe1987]

Amazon reviews are merely a way of seeing what the general readership thinks of a book (in cases where there are enough reviews to give you a fair idea; all the WoT books have hundreds). Most are not absurd by any means; some are, but the vast majority are legit (and for books 8-10 at least of WoT, far more entertaining than the books). Alternatively, an author could visit forums like this one where readers make intelligent criticisms of books. Or they could read bloggers.

Well, RJ clearly read some reviews, and likely had an idea about the reaction in various fora, since he did state that he made a mistake with the way he structured CoT.

I'm not suggesting that everyone do this by any means; some authors are new, little-discussed and hearing uncensored criticism of their books would hurt more than it would help. Plenty of authors don't read any reviews of their books, and that's legitimate, particularly if so little is said about the books at all that they're likely to blow one person's obscure complaint out of proportion. But Jordan produced several books running that all had the same problems, which were well-articulated in the reviews, on forums, etc., and which he chose to ignore--thus leading to the next book having the exact same problems. Meanwhile, he acted like a dick about it.

They didn't have the same problems though. tPoD was majorly criticized for not having Mat. WH lacked Egwene, and initially was viewed a lot more positively because of the importance of the last scene. CoT had all the characters, and crawled worse than anything seen in the series before, and got criticized for that.

The 8-10 book slow down wasn't even a phenomenon that was immediately noticed, IIRC. I remember several decent reviews of WH.

Post CoT, RJ clearly did listen to his readers, since KoD was markedly faster.

I don't really see why insulting Amazon reviews makes one a dick.

[Gertrude]

This is one thing where I don't even get where people are coming from. Sure, some of the politics get mired in the really slow plot movement of books 8-10, but what's even in those books is pretty excellent.

Specifically what turned me off early was the introduction of Daes Dae'mar. It was all tell and no show. We are told that there are plots within schemes wrapped in secrets, etc, but all we see is Rand rising to master it by ignoring it. We did see some of the plotting, but nothing that IMO lived up to the hype we get for Daes Dae'mar. I agree that complexity just for the sake of it is bad, but none of the politics we see rises above the level of ordinary. Perhaps Martin has spoiled me. I'd say my favorite bit of plotting was Couladin and Asmo with the dragon tattoos - it was nice and simple, but had huge consequences and showed the Forsaken working in the background.

So I agree with this, but I don't see Sanderson improving it so far either. The areas where he has improved the series--say, staying in track plotwise--are areas where Jordan could have done it himself (based on what he did with the early books) but chose not to.

Right. At this point, the story is coming to a close and it has been mapped out and certain things have to happen, so it's a little late to make that comparison. Sanderson 'rescuing' the series would not be possible if not for all the groundwork Jordan laid - Sanderson is just the caretaker at this point.

Specifically, I was thinking how much better this story would have been if GRRM, or an author of similar caliber, had told it. WoT's strength is the world and the story, not the characterization. I salivate over the thought of what this story could have been with fully realized characters and more attention paid to the details between the broad strokes. I know not everyone will agree, and this is just my personal preference. Like I said, I do still enjoy these books and am looking forward to the next ones.

[fionwe1987]

Specifically what turned me off early was the introduction of Daes Dae'mar. It was all tell and no show. We are told that there are plots within schemes wrapped in secrets, etc, but all we see is Rand rising to master is by ignoring it. We did see some of the plotting, but nothing that IMO lived up to the hype we get for Daes, Dae'mar. I agree that complexity just for the sake of it is bad, but none of the politics we see rises above the level of ordinary. Perhaps Martin has spoiled me. I'd say my favorite bit of plotting was Couladin and Asmo with the dragon tattoos - it was nice and simple, but had huge consequences and showed the Forsaken working in the background.

Huh? The initial intro to Das'de'mar was bad, till you realize it is a satire on extremely complex political plots.

But that ends in book 2. The Aes Sedai plots are generally far from simple, and I think I discussed, for example, the political situation that resulted in Egwene becoming Amyrlin. That was pretty complex, and was never told to us, but only hinted at here and there. A lot of the other Aes Sedai plotting around the Rebllion is also fairly complex, especially if you throw in the fact that Sheriam and Alviarin were both Black Ajah.

Graendal's plans in Arad Doman aren't simple, nor is it even yet clear what Moridin's plan for Elayne was, with the whole Lady Shiane/Daved Hanlon thing. That's probably soon going to explode on Elayne's face.

Verin, of course, was handled better than almost any other "mystery" character I've ever seen. There was so much that shouted out the truth, yet hidden in plain sight so well that I don't think a single person figured out her plot in its entirety.

Jordan was very good with politics. He understood the role of information flow and knowledge in driving character motivation very well, and used it to great effect. Even the initial Das'de'mar episodes make sense, and fail only because they are quick and seen through nothing but Rand's PoV.

[Gertrude]

Yes, daes dae'mar intro was over the top into ridiculousness and we were supposed to be rolling our eyes with Rand, but I don't think it worked. The characters continued to treat Daes Dae'mar as deadly serious, but we never ever see it. It would have worked better as satire if none of the others (i.e. Thom) took it as seriously as the players did.

So I guess we disagree. I get where you are coming from - those are good points, but it wasn't interesting to read about. Perhaps that is the big sin in my eyes, he didn't make me care about any of that.

[Old Nan]

if GRRM, or an author of similar caliber, had told it.

Well, rape certainly wouldn't be limited to the Forsaken, the Myrddraal, and the most egregiously lawless parts of Arad Doman, that's for sure.

Daes Dae'mar was poorly handled, certainly. In an epic, a satire like that can work as one humorous scene or as the focus of the book as a whole (like ASOIAF or Warhammer40K), but bringing it up repeatedly with no payoff did the story no favors. The rest of the politics is decent, but it's clearly not the point of the story. (I dunno, I like the Elayne-in-Caemlyn plot, but there are a lot of vocal people who do not)

[David Selig]

About the politics, manipulation and intrigues I will put this way - if Petir Baelish or Steerpike were nobles in Randland, they would've become the most powerful person in their country very easily. Or if they happened to be born there as female chanellers, they'd have risen through the Aes Sedai ranks with absolute ease. Egwene's ridiculously easy manipulation of everyone in the Tower shows that quite clearly. This is how simplistic and naive I find the politics and the manipulation shown in WoT.

[Shryke]

About the politics, manipulation and intrigues I will put this way - if Petir Baelish or Steerpike were nobles in Randland, they would've become the most powerful person in their country very easily. Or if they happened to be born there as female chanellers, they'd have risen through the Aes Sedai ranks with absolute ease. Egwene's ridiculously easy manipulation of everyone in the Tower shows that quite clearly. This is how simplistic and naive I find the politics and the manipulation shown in WoT.

"Egwene's ridiculously easy manipulation of everyone in the Tower"???

She didn't manipulate anyone, she inspired and proved herself.

Everyone always makes these comments about "LOL Littlefinger would rule the WoT world!" but what is it that makes WOT so "simple" in your mind?

[Shryke]

Specifically, I was thinking how much better this story would have been if GRRM, or an author of similar caliber, had told it. WoT's strength is the world and the story, not the characterization. I salivate over the thought of what this story could have been with fully realized characters and more attention paid to the details between the broad strokes. I know not everyone will agree, and this is just my personal preference. Like I said, I do still enjoy these books and am looking forward to the next ones.

There's ton of fully realised characters in WOT. While there are alot of similarish attitudes among people (especially the women) and such, the main and secondary characters are all very distinct and well painted and have their own voices and everything.

Rand, Perrin, Mat, Egwene, Nynaeve, Elayne, Moraine, Cadsuane, Elaida, etc are all very well done.

It's not as good as GRRM, who can paint a character beautifully in only a chapter or 2, but it's still very well done.