# Anyone else likes Robert Jordan better than Tolkien?



## Melkor Lord Of ALL! (Mar 25, 2004)

So am I alone thinking that Wheel Of Time, or at least first five books, rock and are the best fantasy series even written? I prefere Jordan because:

-he has even more complex and detailed world than Tolkien, it seems to live its own life, besides the main story.
-there are so many interesting and diffrent characters, you can even get into the head of bad guys and their thoughts, Jordan`s evil is much more complex and less bland than Tolkien`s who doesn`t have such interesting villains as let`s say Lanfear.
-those series feature many shades of gray, while still showing epic struggle of good versus evil.
-the plot is so deep, with many layers, mysteries and misleadings. 
-No scene in Lord Of The Rings or Silmariilon got me so excited as, let`s say, Rand`s battle versus Rahvin.
-Finally, the ratio of beautiful women is much in favor of Jordan


----------



## Psychic Warrior (Mar 25, 2004)

Good stories have endings...


----------



## Wombat (Mar 26, 2004)

Psychic Warrior said:
			
		

> Good stories have endings...




Hard to top this argument


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Mar 26, 2004)

Wombat said:
			
		

> Hard to top this argument



 Agreed


----------



## barsoomcore (Mar 26, 2004)

Nope, you're probably not alone.

I don't agree with you or any of your points, but I'm quite sure there are people who do.


----------



## mmu1 (Mar 26, 2004)

Whether you like WoT better than LotR is a matter of taste...

Jordan's merit as a writer is another matter. Personally, I think he turned into an unforgivable hack and doesn't come close to being able to claim any "Best of" titles. 

Even if you ignore everything but the first five books his writing is often repetitive and full of cliches, and he constantly fails when it comes one of the most important tenets of good writing - show, don't tell. He just goes on interminably, describing what everyone thinks and feels even when it's completely unnecessary, instead of letting the characters' words and actions stand for themselves.

There are very many _awful_ fantasy series out there (since too many by far are just cash cows for hack authors) but it's still extremely easy to find several much better written than the WoT. Ursula LeGuin's "Earthsea", Steven Brust's "Jhereg", Glen Cook's "Black Company" books (in particular the first ones) George R.R. Martin's "Song of Ice and Fire", Gene Wolfe's "Book of the New Sun"...


----------



## barsoomcore (Mar 26, 2004)

mmu1 said:
			
		

> Whether you like WoT better than LotR is a matter of taste...
> 
> Jordan's merit as a writer is another matter.



 No, it's not. I mean, I agree with you, frankly I think you're too kind, but it's still a matter of taste. There's plenty of people who like Jordan just fine and they're not dummies. They just have different tastes than you.

Excellent list of recommendations, though, to which I must add Steven Erikson's _Malazan Books of the Fallen_, starting with _The Gardens of the Moon_ -- out in the US this summer! Not to be missed.


----------



## Taelorn76 (Mar 26, 2004)

I liked the first few books from WoT, I thougt they were good and I could not put them down. The first five or six books were out already when I started reading them and I just went from one to the next. I do have to agree though, that they have become repetitive. At first I thought it was _because_ I read them back to back, but now I see it is accually the way Jordan writes. I mean so much happens in each book, but yet nothing really happens to advance the story. It seems to be the same formula of charcters criss-crossing the continent, and ending with Rand battleling a Chosen One. One other issue I have is that there are way to many characters and plots going one that you loose track of what is going on.

The series started out good but it has dragged on for way to long. What mmu1 said about "show, don't tell" is right on the money. I think that you could remove 50 to 100 pages from each of the books and still have a good if not better understanding of what is going on.


----------



## Dragonblade (Mar 26, 2004)

I like Jordan and feel he is an exceptional writer. I agree that there are definitely slow parts and his prose could be a little more focused in the later books, BUT that being said I said I still think he is awesome.

Writing is all a matter of taste anyway. One man's "hack" is another man's genius and vice versa. Personally, I prefer books that are fun to read with cool epic stories, and larger than life heroes. Robert Jordan, Raymond Feist, and David Gemmell are my favorite authors.


----------



## KenM (Mar 26, 2004)

I love the LotR movies, but I hate JRRT's writing style. I could never get into RJ either. George RR Martin is better IMO.


----------



## mmu1 (Mar 26, 2004)

barsoomcore said:
			
		

> No, it's not. I mean, I agree with you, frankly I think you're too kind, but it's still a matter of taste. There's plenty of people who like Jordan just fine and they're not dummies. They just have different tastes than you.
> [/i] -- out in the US this summer! Not to be missed.




I beg to differ. Liking Jordan's books is like (I guess I'm about to be somewhat unfair to Jordan) liking McDonalds food. A matter of taste.

Arguing that Jordan is a good writer is like arguing that McDonalds makes high quality food that's good for you.

Writing is not an abstract art, it's (at least to a large degree) a skill, which makes it possible to quantify it. You can either use the written word to clearly and accurately convey ideas, or you can't. Someone whose last four or five books had been a meandering mess certainly isn't doing that.


----------



## ConnorSB (Mar 26, 2004)

Psychic Warrior said:
			
		

> Good stories have endings...



 Took the words right out of my mouth.


----------



## Dragonblade (Mar 26, 2004)

Writing is an art and is wholly subjective about what's good or bad. Its not like math where 2+2=4 regardless of what your opinion of math is.

Whether Jordan's plot meanders or not is subjective. Whether its a mess or not is subjective and mere opinion.

I could easily find equal fault with the writing of authors you like.


----------



## Planesdragon (Mar 26, 2004)

mmu1 said:
			
		

> Writing is not an abstract art, it's (at least to a large degree) a skill, which makes it possible to quantify it. You can either use the written word to clearly and accurately convey ideas, or you can't. Someone whose last four or five books had been a meandering mess certainly isn't doing that.



 "Writing" is a skill.  A lawyer writes.  A journalist writes.  In fact, "painting" and "sculpting" are also skills--you can get very precise and technical about either one.

 However, when you deal with art and numbers, the only thing that matters is taste.  "Is Jordaon a good writer" is simply the wrong question to ask; he's not writing legal briefs or the sunday times.  "Is Jordan a good storyteller" (or, alternatley, "does Jordan tell a good story?") is the proper question.


 As for WoT not ending--a better argument would be that good stories are whole.  The story in, oh, Path of Daggers isn't all that bad, and a serial number of stories could do wonders.  Jordan's problem is that he's selling parts of a grand tale that don't seperate into clear stories--and that's the biggest fault that can be laid at his feet.

 OTOH, it's also an inherited fault.  If you try and read Dragons of Spring Dawning or Return of the King by themselves, they simply don't make sense, because they're not whole stories.

 Good fantasy, IMO, can show or tell as much as the author can convince the reader to read.  It can go on in story after story, with a metaplot that doesn't end.  What good fantasy cannot do and remain good, IMO, is to forget that each novel is a story unto itself, and should stand on its own--or be labeled and sold as a volume of a larger work.  (Or in other words--Jordan should stop naming his novels, and just call them Wheel of Time vol. I-XII)


----------



## Pants (Mar 26, 2004)

Hm, even back when I thought that RJ was the end-all-be-all fantasy writer, I still held Tolkien in higher regard.  If only because Tolkien was the first fantasy book - nay first true book - that I ever read.  I appreciate his world building ability more, plus Tolkien I believe, is the better writer.

Personally, I'd much rather read George RR Martin, Robin Hobb, or China Mieville than Jordan anymore.  I was planning on forcing myself to reread the series (mainly in order to see if I still like it anymore), but I just can't do it.  Jordan has created a very cool world - with some logic problems - which is inhabited by a dazzling array of cardboard characters, annoying characters, stupid characters, and whiny characters.  More often than not, many characters possess most of these traits.

Also, Jordan has such an exhaustive list of characters, shallow plots, that I just can't care too much anymore.  I really don't care why Aes Sedai-with-green-strap-on-her-neck-who-sneezes-all-the-time, dislikes Aes Sedai with piercing blue eyes who is cold and reserved.  Another problem is that many of the characters aren't defined by personalities, but by one or two traits.  All of these extra characters then end up blending together in an unsightly mess.  Who is Faolin?  What did she do?  Who is this character that I'm reading about?  I can't remember why she's doing this and it's boring, so I really don't care to look it up.

Blah blah blah.  The Wheel of Cash turns and my money comes and goes, leaving wallets that fade to credit cards and credit cards that fade to checks.  What was once a beginning will never be an ending for there a no true endings in the Wheel of Time for as long as I have my trusty dollar...


----------



## Dark Jezter (Mar 26, 2004)

> Anyone else likes Robert Jordan better than Tolkien?




I don't.  But I do like Robert E. Howard better than Tolkien.


----------



## Mark (Mar 26, 2004)

Of the two long-winded bastards mentioned, I prefer Tolkein.  But only because I tackled it when I was young enough to have the patience to read him all the way through...


----------



## Salthanas (Mar 26, 2004)

I think my reason would have to work alot harder than my imagination for me to come to the conclusion that Jordan is better than Tolkien


----------



## Tonguez (Mar 26, 2004)

Dark Jezter said:
			
		

> But I do like Robert E. Howard better than Tolkien.




Absolutely!
Comparing Authors is stupid, comparing what each of us likes whilst futile is at least more constructive...


----------



## mmu1 (Mar 26, 2004)

Dragonblade said:
			
		

> Writing is an art and is wholly subjective about what's good or bad. Its not like math where 2+2=4 regardless of what your opinion of math is.
> 
> Whether Jordan's plot meanders or not is subjective. Whether its a mess or not is subjective and mere opinion.
> 
> I could easily find equal fault with the writing of authors you like.




Since you have a vested emotional interest in those books, I'm sure you need to tell yourself that. Often. 

Someday you'll realize it's ok to admit you like some things even though they're bad for you.

Isn't it great, though? It's all relative, so I'm not actually being obnoxious and condescending, I'm just being honest. Hell, I'm writing, so I'm actually being an artist as well.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Mar 26, 2004)

Sorry but there are too many other writers better than both, Zelanzy, Wagner, Burroughs, Howard, etc..


----------



## Melkor Lord Of ALL! (Mar 26, 2004)

Yes I know that last books are a bit slow, but I still love this world. I like Tolkien, Cook, Zelazny, Howard, Salvatore, King, Prachett, some Polish authors etc., but only Jordan` s world makes me care so much. Anyway I was bored and tired of Jordan`s bashing so I made this post.


----------



## Cannibal_Kender (Mar 26, 2004)

I really liked Jordan's Wheel of Time series.....up to book 10. What exactly happend there? Seemed like there was only 200 or so pages of actual substance....and also whats this about New Spring:the series is long enough as it is...now he's doing a prequel?

At this rate the series will probably be done by the time I'm in a retirement home.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Mar 26, 2004)

Melkor said:
			
		

> Anyway I was bored and tired of Jordan`s bashing so I made this post.




 A troll!  

I think the bashing is because people want an ending, he is starting to drag out a good thing, he could wrapped this story up and started on another and still be seen as a god among other writers but nooooooo he has to out do Ron Hubberts.


----------



## SpikeyFreak (Mar 26, 2004)

The things that I really can't stand really don't have much to do with his writing.

My main problem is that the guy apparently has some serious issues with women.  Every man in the story is so obsequious towards the female characters it's maddening.

And if I ever read about someone pulling at a pony tail again I'm going to claw my eyes out so I can be sure never to have to see it again.

--Harsh Spikey


----------



## BiggusGeekus (Mar 26, 2004)

Cannibal_Kender said:
			
		

> I really liked Jordan's Wheel of Time series.....up to book 10. What exactly happend there? Seemed like there was only 200 or so pages of actual substance....and also whats this about New Spring:the series is long enough as it is...now he's doing a prequel?




Well, I actually kind of liked the concept behind a prequel. If he's going to milk the series -- and I think we can all agree at least on that point -- then I'd rather he developed the world than write a page and a half of background about a minor character that we only see once.*

As I've said in another post, for me the series was cool (as opposed to good) up to about book 4.  There were events in books 5, 6 and 7 that I thought could have been compressed together to make one good book.  And 8+ is just wacky.  I mean, really wacky.  We really don't need a chapter about a bath unless this is a pay-per-view movie, _Wheel of Time: Aes Sedi Gone Wild!_

Tolkien was weak on dialogue and pacing, but his main strength was setting.  One reason he put off finishing the _Simerilion_ was because he was having a hard time working out elvish metaphysics.  If Jordan was ever concerned about such a thing, he'd spend a bit of time making something up and writing it down with little attention spent to see if it made sense or not.

I'll likely read other WoT books.  But I'll get them from the library or wait a couple of years for them to come out in paperback.  Jordan has often said that he already has the ending envisioned and I have a strong feeling that it's not going to be "Hey, the Dark One totally wasted Rand!  I guess the bad guys win after all."


----------



## Umbran (Mar 26, 2004)

Planesdragon said:
			
		

> However, when you deal with art and numbers, the only thing that matters is taste.




I disagree.  It is perfectly reasonable to consider Jordan's _technical_ merits as a writer important.  I expect every grade school teacher in the country will tell you that one's technical abilities as a writer are important.  In the judging of many arts (dance, for instance), the artist's technical abilities are at least as important as their expressive abilities.  Why should it be otherwise with writing?

Given two authors - one who tells a good story, but is technically sloppy, and one who tells a good story, but is technically exquisite, which is the better writer?  I'd say the latter would be the superior artist.  

My fiancee is currently reading a book, lauded by many of her friends as a great story.  She says yes, the story's decent.  The characters are solid enough.  But the author's grasp of structure stinks.  Changes from first to thrid person viewpoint can be done, but not in the middle of a sentence!

Jordan's major technical flaw as a writer is as other's have mentioned - a good story has a begining, middle, and an end.  The lack of conclusion and resolutions in Jordan's work mars the story as a whole.  Jordan knows how to earn money.  But, if he doesn't know how to end a story, he's not a particularly good writer.  Sorry.


----------



## ASH (Mar 26, 2004)

First let me just point out that when you typed this stentence..



> -Finally, the ratio of beautiful women is much in favor of Jordan



 It got me a little fired up  So, based on this point alone, the book could suck, but as long as there are cute chicks, it does not matter. I know that you did not mean it that way. But it just is not a valid argument on what the girls look like.
The way Jordan writes women makes me want to slap him.  Pretty or not..  LOTR women are written much better than WOT women, at least in my opinion. They seem more real. 

I have read all the WOT books including New Spring. I enjoyed New Spring. I would encourage anyone who enjoy's jordans books to read it.  All and all i enjoyed the WOT series too. I would like it to end. But, after reading George RR Martin, i have realized what good writing is.
Jordan's writing needs a good editor. He is not writing a book, he is writing a manuscript for a movie.   :\ 

The real reason i disagree with you and think that Tolkien is a much better writer than Jordan is because of the time that the books came out.. 

Tolkien wrote his books before DnD, before the concept of Fantasy was really a developed concept at all. He developed it. He is, in my opinion the father of fantasy and not a hack..he may have had some inspirations from legends and lore, but he developed it in to an epic world. The first epic fantasy world. 

Jordan's world is neat. Epic and complex, and full of great fantasy concepts, that have been done, and done and done. 

The writing of both these men have driven me batty. They are both long winded and at times a bit on the boring side.  Writing alone, i'd say they are both about on par with each other.  

As for story, i like LOTRs better. The story is simple, and direct. I feel as if I can identify with a few characters in the books. Granted the movies, help.

WOT is not done yet, perhaps it will have some crazy kick ass ending, but I doubt it. I think it will be about on par with what they have come out with so far. My respect for Jordan is gone as a writer, i feel that he is just trying to get as much money as he can, despite his fans. 

So far my favorite books are the song of ice and fire by Martin. I have found the writing style to be easy to read and understand. The story is great, and unpredictable, and the characters very cool. 

I love feeding the trolls!


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Mar 26, 2004)

I love Jordan, but I've been getting more and more frustrated with each passing book. Something really needs to happen in the next book to get the series back on track. That said, I've never read or saw a battle scene on a television that can compare to Dumai's Wells.

That said, while I adore the _story_ of LotR, I detest Tolkein's writing. I finally managed to make it through _The Hobbit_ and it was like driving a rusty nail into my knee-cap.


----------



## Crothian (Mar 26, 2004)

Jordan's first few books were okay, but I felt there was no character growth and they made the same mistakes over and over.  It's been a while since I read them but it's the only series I've read part of and have no intention of ever finishing.


----------



## Planesdragon (Mar 26, 2004)

Umbran said:
			
		

> Jordan's major technical flaw as a writer is as other's have mentioned - a good story has a begining, middle, and an end. The lack of conclusion and resolutions in Jordan's work mars the story as a whole. Jordan knows how to earn money. But, if he doesn't know how to end a story, he's not a particularly good writer. Sorry.



 The Wheel of Time, as a work, suffers from having its subplots be the main component of "storytelling", like how an episodic TV show works.

 Dismissing Jordan just because "his story doesn't have a begining, middle, or end" is akin to dismissing a Jazz musician for not following meter.  Novel-writing is art, and in art the rules can be broken for reason.  A better critique on Jordan isn't "He doesn't follow grade-school writing rules", but rather "he meanders on too long, and fails to compensate for his deviations from the standard form."

 (on a side note, I must admire the attempt to express a world-spanning tale by having it actually feel like there's more than just a camping trip through three towns.)


----------



## Hand of Evil (Mar 26, 2004)

A friend and myself have a theory that each book is a smaller increment in time.  The first and second book took place over a years time, the third & fourth months, the fifth & sixth weeks, the seventh & eighth days, the ninth & tenth hours.  Books 11 and 12 will be minutes of time passing!


----------



## Taelorn76 (Mar 26, 2004)

I enjoyed _The New Spring_. It made the world seem a more alive, that not everything revolved around Rand, even though it does.  :\  That makes no sense , what I am trying to say is that I enjoyed a pre-Rand world. I would recomend it even if you have not read any of the others.



			
				Cannibal_Kender said:
			
		

> ...whats this about New Spring:the series is long enough as it is...now he's doing a prequel?




He has mentioned that he is doing a total of 3 prequels, and hopes to finish with a total of 12 main books, but is not ruling out 13.   He also mentioned that he originaly thought he could do the whole story in 6 books. 

That would have been nice.


----------



## ASH (Mar 26, 2004)

That would have been super nice.. 6 books!

I am actually looking forward to the next prequel.. I also enjoyed a pre-Rand world.

It gave me a few idea's about running a WOT campaign.


----------



## Taelorn76 (Mar 26, 2004)

Here is a link to Tors website on Robert Jordan  WoT

This is a link to a video interview where he discusses future books and some other questions.  Bookwrap
Just click the bookwrap icon to start playback.


----------



## Ranger REG (Mar 27, 2004)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> That said, while I adore the _story_ of LotR, I detest Tolkein's writing. I finally managed to make it through _The Hobbit_ and it was like driving a rusty nail into my knee-cap.



Well, Tolkien wasn't your conventional, traditional fiction writers. A professor of language and literature does not make him a story writer. Perhaps it was luck and opportunity that allow him to go down in history as being the creator of modern fantasy genre, and the father of fantasy literature.

* ducks for cover from Fundamental Tolkien Purists *


----------



## Dragonblade (Mar 27, 2004)

mmu1 said:
			
		

> Since you have a vested emotional interest in those books, I'm sure you need to tell yourself that. Often.
> 
> Someday you'll realize it's ok to admit you like some things even though they're bad for you.
> 
> Isn't it great, though? It's all relative, so I'm not actually being obnoxious and condescending, I'm just being honest. Hell, I'm writing, so I'm actually being an artist as well.




I like lots of things that are bad for me. Pizza comes to mind!


----------



## drothgery (Mar 27, 2004)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> I love Jordan, but I've been getting more and more frustrated with each passing book. Something really needs to happen in the next book to get the series back on track. That said, I've never read or saw a battle scene on a television that can compare to Dumai's Wells.



Actually, that the Dumai's Well's scene happened at all is symptomatic of Jordan's problems. He clearly rushed the development of the Asha'man (creating them and making them a major force in the world in one book -- and in less than two months of "book time"), had only a handwaving retconned-explanation of how they showed up for the party at all, and missed a perfect chance to settle a few other plot threads by have Egwene & co. play the rescue party instead.



			
				Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> That said, while I adore the _story_ of LotR, I detest Tolkein's writing. I finally managed to make it through _The Hobbit_ and it was like driving a rusty nail into my knee-cap.



Which is to say that I'd much rather read 9 of the 11 WoT-universe novels than any book of LotR, and even the painfully-bad writing in _The Path of Daggers_ is far more readable than the beginning of Fellowship or JRRT's poetry.


----------



## ConnorSB (Mar 27, 2004)

Here is how I view the issue:

I hate that LotR wasn't as easy a read as The Hobbit.

I hate that Jordan has written so many books

I hate that Martin has written so few.


----------



## Andrew D. Gable (Mar 27, 2004)

I agree with all these people who've posted.  Yeah, I admit, Jordan's not the best writer in the world.  But that said, I like the series.  True, it drags for me... but I can usually find at least a few positive things about nearly anything (House of 1000 Corpses comes to mind).  I wouldn't say I like him better than Tolkien (well, see later), but I certainly don't mind him.  WOT and Dark Sun were two of the major influences on my homebrew, after all.

Tolkien... well, we're all of course indebted to the man, after all he did create the whole genre we're all so into, but admit it.  He reads like the instruction manual for your VCR.  I can appreciate how he was influenced greatly by Medieval works, and I love everything about Middle-Earth, but I could never be one of those folks who reads and rereads LOTR 20 times over.


----------



## drothgery (Mar 27, 2004)

ConnorSB said:
			
		

> Here is how I view the issue:
> 
> I hate that LotR wasn't as easy a read as The Hobbit.



Well, one out of three ain't bad.



			
				ConnorSB said:
			
		

> I hate that Jordan has written so many books



There's nothing wrong with Jordan writing 10 novels after _Eye of the World_. The problem is that the seventh or eighth wasn't the last book of the main cycle of _The Wheel of Time_.



			
				ConnorSB said:
			
		

> I hate that Martin has written so few.



There's no accounting for taste.


----------



## ConnorSB (Mar 27, 2004)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Well, one out of theee ain't bad.
> 
> 
> There's nothing wrong with Jordan writing 10 novels after _Eye of the World_. The problem is that the seventh or eighth wasn't the last book of the main cycle of _The Wheel of Time_.
> ...



 Wait... what?

I think the idea I was trying to get across was that I think things would be much better if George RR Martin had written as many books as Jordan has. That is, in addition to the 3 good ones we have now. Like, I want that date in 10ish years when Martin finishes A Song of Ice and Fire to be right now, not in 10 years.

And I wish Jordan's books were condensed to 3 or 4 ones. Like... Martin and Jordan should switch book counts, but maintain thier current level of writing quality (The 3 Jordan books would just be better editted than the current 11, pared down to something, well, readable).

EDIT: Here's what I'm trying to say:

Wheel of Time could have used a lot fewer words and could have gotten to the point.

A Song of Ice and fire is amazing and needs for there to be more words written- Martin needs to produce book four, and book five and....


----------



## drothgery (Mar 27, 2004)

I think you're missing a critical piece of information here.

I think Martin's _A Song of Ice and Fire_ is mediocre at best, and I can't understand how much praise is heaped on the series, especially vis as vis Jordan's _Wheel of Time_. Criticizing Jordan relative to Guy Kay, who's the best crafter of prose in modern fantasy, or Steven Brust, who keeps every novel full of action from the start to the end, or Robin Hobb, who's created a truly original universe, or Steven Erikson, who's redefined what a setting with epic scope is -- that, I get. Relative to Martin? I don't see it.


----------



## ASH (Mar 27, 2004)

drothgery said:
			
		

> I think you're missing a critical piece of information here.
> 
> I think Martin's _A Song of Ice and Fire_ is mediocre at best, and I can't understand how much praise is heaped on the series, especially vis as vis Jordan's _Wheel of Time_. Criticizing Jordan relative to Guy Kay, who's the best crafter of prose in modern fantasy, or Steven Brust, who keeps every novel full of action from the start to the end, or Robin Hobb, who's created a truly original universe, or Steven Erikson, who's redefined what a setting with epic scope is -- that, I get. Relative to Martin? I don't see it.




I have to disagree with you.. I think that ASoIaF is a better series than WoT is. Perhaps, had i recieved the same feeling after the last 5 WoT books, that I had after the first 5, but i did not, he lost it. At some point the story that was neat and the world that was complex just got silly and boring to me.  Its all a matter of taste. I have not read Guy Kay, Robin Hobb, Steven Erikson, or Steven Burst, so perhaps that could discount my opnion in your eyes. I still think that Martin is a great author, and I know more than a few that agree with me.


----------



## jdavis (Mar 27, 2004)

Melkor said:
			
		

> -Finally, the ratio of beautiful women is much in favor of Jordan



How would you know? Because he described them beautiful? They are writing on a page any beauty they may have is the beauty you ascribe to them when you read the description. Crazy women, intense women, deep women, shallow women, women who have whole chapters written about them taking a bath, those I'll buy, but beautiful? they are written characters not visual ones, besides it makes it sound like you are talking about a cheap romance novel.

Jordan lost me with book ten "The Crossroads of I've got a house payment due, buy my book". What a pathetic joke on his loyal fans that one was.


----------



## Orius (Mar 28, 2004)

Taelorn76 said:
			
		

> I enjoyed _The New Spring_. It made the world seem a more alive, that not everything revolved around Rand, even though it does.  :\  That makes no sense , what I am trying to say is that I enjoyed a pre-Rand world. I would recomend it even if you have not read any of the others.




I see he finally expanded it into a full-length novel.  I read about a year ago he was interested in doing that, as well as a couple of other prequels.

I read the "New Spring" novella that was in _Legends_, or whatever that compilation was from a few years ago.  It was a pretty good, self-contained story and the 



Spoiler



scene where Moiraine encounters Cadsuane


is certainly worth the read.



> He has mentioned that he is doing a total of 3 prequels, and hopes to finish with a total of 12 main books, but is not ruling out 13.   He also mentioned that he originaly thought he could do the whole story in 6 books.




How many books has he been saying there's only 2 or 3 left? 

Still, I have read that he knows how the story is supposed to end, so I'm not as cynical as some.


----------



## Taelorn76 (Mar 28, 2004)

Orius said:
			
		

> Still, I have read that he knows how the story is supposed to end, so I'm not as cynical as some.




Yeah, he mentioned it in the interviews linked above that he has known the ending of the WoT series for the past 20 years.


----------



## drothgery (Mar 28, 2004)

Orius said:
			
		

> How many books has he been saying there's only 2 or 3 left?
> 
> Still, I have read that he knows how the story is supposed to end, so I'm not as cynical as some.



He was saying "at least three more books" from about the post-_Fires of Heaven_ (book 5) period to the post-_Winter's Heart_ signings. He started saying "at least two more, and almost certainly no more than three more [not counting the prequels]" with the post-_Crossroads of Twilight_ signings and interviews. For myself, I can't figure out how enough happened in CoT to have any effect on the number of books it will take to finish the series.


----------



## FreeTheSlaves (Mar 28, 2004)

At around book 6 I started skipping whole chapters. The array of characters were too many, their stories too minor and I felt no empathy. I finished book 8 and 9 and actually skipped 1/2 the pages (300 pages each) because I can't tolerate Nynaeve, Elaine, Aviendha and some others. Even Rand has become tiring.

Oh yeah, RJ has got his favourite characters suffering badly of invincible-itis. I believe nothing can threaten them. 

Other than the waffling, I think the series would have been improved with a bit less romance being thrown into every single relationship.

RJ would be the better author if he had an editor who had the power to say "no".


----------



## GoodKingJayIII (Mar 28, 2004)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Well, Tolkien wasn't your conventional, traditional fiction writers. A professor of language and literature does not make him a story writer. Perhaps it was luck and opportunity that allow him to go down in history as being the creator of modern fantasy genre, and the father of fantasy literature.
> 
> * ducks for cover from Fundamental Tolkien Purists *




Right you are REG.  Though I would have to say that of the two I prefer Tolkien.  One reason is because I am biased - no sense in covering that up.  But I love Tolkien's style; it lends a versimilitude to his world, much as Jordan's style does to his, or Martin's to his, etc.  Tolkien's writing is almost Beowulfian at times, obviously from his studies as a professor of Anglo Saxon and language.  The 3rd Age is a time for epic heroics, a time of great evil and ultimate good.  Tolkien gives us that in his style as well as story.

The funny thing is, I think you'll find professional novel-writers telling you that _both_ of them were poor writers.  It's not something they studied.  Didn't RJ go to the Citadel and earn his Masters in Physics?  But again, they're among the most popular of fantasy authors.

A few people have brought up the old adage "it's a matter of taste."  While I think that's all well and good, I think taste can be turned into analysis.  If you grill someone long enough and hard enough they can tell you why they like something or dislike something.

For instance, while I enjoy RJ's colorful style and consistent usage of metaphors that give me a wonderfully clear picture of his world, I dislike his characters, specifically the female ones.  Their is a real elitism dividing the sexes in his world which, while somewhat representative of our own world, _no one_ deviates from.  I've only lived for 21 years and I know there are plenty of people that do not adhere to this kind of "battle of the sexes."  In a world like RJ's, I find that hard to believe as well.

His plots bother me as well.  It's interesting and admirable that he's created so many characters; however, readers have rights too, and creating plots, counter-plots, idosyncratic plots, counter-minute-idiosyncratic plots, etc. completely shatters those writes.  _I_ can't remember all that bs, and most readers don't have perfect recall.  I'm not going to reread all ten books so I know what's going on in the eleventh.  As someone mentioned, it does lend to the realism.  However, the story is about the Dragon, and the small core of people that surround him:  specifically Perrin, Mat, Egwene, Lan, Moiraine (sp?), and Nynaeve.  Throw in the bad guys, and already that's _a lot_ of characters to handle.  I want _them_ to develop, and _them_ to grow; they're the ones I've become attached to and now I rarely get to see them.  It's frustrating, as a reader.

That's basically why I don't like Jordan.  The first three books were wonderful, but after that I believe he began to lose focus, more and more.  Because he is not focused, I think his story is largely lost to the reader.  I'm sure as hell lost. :\ 

Cheers!


----------



## Celtavian (Mar 28, 2004)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Well, Tolkien wasn't your conventional, traditional fiction writers. A professor of language and literature does not make him a story writer. Perhaps it was luck and opportunity that allow him to go down in history as being the creator of modern fantasy genre, and the father of fantasy literature.




And a great passion for fairy tales and epics. Tolkien enjoyed what he wrote as much as fans enjoy reading it. 

He was a very competent writer. I feel the boring parts of _Lord of the Rings_ only lend greater verisimilitude to the overall story. Not every part can be slam bang action and intrigue. The hobbits were traveling about marveling at the world of Middle Earth as much a tourist as the reader and when Frodo and Sam were traveling, they weren't great heros capable of fighting hordes of orcs, they were weary, overburdened hobbits who fate favored from time to time. All in all, the boring, slow parts made the characters seem more believable and real in a way that most authors can't seem to manage, including Robert Jordan and George R.R. Martin (whom I think is a great writer as well).

How many writers can take an utterly non-combat character like Frodo and Sam and make them interesting and capable? Even in Martin's stories, only Sansa and Catelyn were non-combat. Even Arya and Tyrion tore it up, and Bran had special powers through his wolf. 

IMO, Tolkien had a wide range characters in his book. He doesn't get credit for very good use of fantasy archetypes, some of which he helped create. 

The story is much more complex, interesting, and varied than most fantasy stories, and if you really studied it in depth you would see how it compares more closely to the "real" world than most of the other stories mentioned, even in characterization. 

Anyhow, it would take a truly inspired author to usurp Tolkien's place in fantasy. Jordan I haven't read all that much of, and Martin is very good, but he's no Tolkien.


----------



## Krieg (Mar 28, 2004)

FreeTheSlaves said:
			
		

> RJ would be the better author if he had an editor who had the power to say "no".




...but then he would probably divorce her, and therein lies the problem.


----------



## Squire James (Mar 28, 2004)

I've never seen an author have people with less power do more than Tolkien.  Similarly, I've never seen an author have people with more power do less than Jordan.

Not that Jordan is necessarily bad, but I think he's overdoing the foibles of the main characters.  I've read books (by Elizabeth Boyer, BTW) where the characters were willfully stupid, but at least these guys were SUPPOSED to be a bit dim!


----------



## Hoodooman (Mar 28, 2004)

*WoT coming to an end soon.  Path of Daggers as the hurdle.*

I think I read somewhere on the newsboards at EN that there are only going to be at most, two more WoT books.  Then probably a prequel or two.  Maybe about Rand's mother and father.

I liked books 1-7, and thought Crown of Swords was the best.  Then I got Path of Daggers and have't been able to get pass the first chapter.  So much for loyalty, eh?  

I then read the jackets of the last book-Crossroads of Twilight and he says that the Madness for male channelers is gone.  What the cheez?  That was the whole limit on male channelers- the Madness.  Don't know where he is going with this arc?!?


----------



## Taelorn76 (Mar 28, 2004)

Hoodooman said:
			
		

> I think I read somewhere on the newsboards at EN that there are only going to be at most, two more WoT books.  Then probably a prequel or two.  Maybe about Rand's mother and father.




My post above takes you to an interview with Robert Jordan where he says that he indeed wants to finish in 2 more books, but the prequels will be released first.

Book Eleven
2nd prequel - Rand's father
3rd prequel - Lan and Moiraine find Rand ( just before _Eye of the World_
Book Twelve 

At least that is what I took it as. :\


----------



## Taelorn76 (Mar 28, 2004)

Double post


----------



## Dragonblade (Mar 29, 2004)

Hoodooman said:
			
		

> I then read the jackets of the last book-Crossroads of Twilight and he says that the Madness for male channelers is gone.  What the cheez?  That was the whole limit on male channelers- the Madness.  Don't know where he is going with this arc?!?




Highligh to read spoiler:

The taint is cleansed from Saidin in Book 9, Winter's Heart. Its very cool.


----------



## GoodKingJayIII (Mar 29, 2004)

I really wish he'd finish the current story before he starts working on a new one.  He's got a trilogy _within_ his.... I-have-no-idea-ology!

It is his story.  He's got author's rights, of course.  But at the expense of the reader's?

I want to say I'm just going to skip the prequels, but I have this feeling I'll like them more than I like the current series.


----------



## ASH (Mar 29, 2004)

Dragonblade said:
			
		

> Highligh to read spoiler:
> 
> The taint
> 
> ...




I also thought that it was very cool..


----------



## Andrew D. Gable (Mar 29, 2004)

Taelorn76 said:
			
		

> My post above takes you to an interview with Robert Jordan where he says that he indeed wants to finish in 2 more books, but the prequels will be released first.




Well then, an AWFUL lot of stuff has to happen in the next two books.  Personally, for all the other prequels, I was hoping he'd do the Trolloc Wars, Lews Therin and the original sealing away of the Dark One, and all that good jazz.


----------



## Taelorn76 (Mar 29, 2004)

Dragonblade said:
			
		

> Highligh to read spoiler:
> 
> The taint is cleansed from Saidin in Book 9, Winter's Heart. Its very cool.




I really need to go reread book 9 I have no memory of that happening.


----------



## Taelorn76 (Mar 29, 2004)

Andrew D. Gable said:
			
		

> Personally, for all the other prequels, I was hoping he'd do the Trolloc Wars, Lews Therin and the original sealing away of the Dark One, and all that good jazz.




Well the prequels are just for the WoT series. There is nothing stopping him from doing other series on Trolloc Wars and such.

Just that many people might not buying for fear of having to go through another dozen books to see a conclusion.


----------



## Orius (Mar 29, 2004)

Comparing Tolkien and jordan is difficult, IMO.  Each man has his own strengths and weaknesses in his writing.  There's really a different flavor between the two worlds.

Tolkien's strengths are his language and myth building.  That's really the whole reason he wrote all that stuff on ME.

Jordan is somewhat of a better world builder, though.  His world has a lot more cities, politics, and cultural diversity than Tolkien.


----------



## Rackhir (Mar 29, 2004)

Isn't asking who's better between the two a bit like asking which makes a better building material - Oxygen or Cheesecake. It's pretty much a meaningless question. 

What ever you think about how much you LIKE Tolkien, there is clearly a very high level of craftsmanship that went into the books. I think the Silmarilion took something like 30+ years to write and the compilations of his notes for it and LotR took up something like 10 books. That amount of effort and the fact that he is pretty much the creator of the fantasy genre really does make his works something special. Doesn't mean everybody is going to like them or think they make for a great story, but they are something unique and unlikely to ever be repeated (Aside from Terry Brooks plaguerizing LotR in "The Sword of Shannara").


----------



## barsoomcore (Mar 29, 2004)

Re: The subjective nature of artistic analysis.

While it's certainly possible to compare authors on objective grounds -- to, for example, compare the number of grammatical errors their prose contains, or the number of adverbs used or any other objective measure one might wish, this doesn't lead you to any sort of conclusion regarding who is the better writer.

Great writers may or may not be great pose stylists. I happen to like great prose stylists, which is why I love writers like Brust and Calvino and Ondaatje. They can take the rules of the English language and USE them to create thrilling tales.

But I also love writers like Henry Miller or Edgar Rice Burroughs who are working in entirely different worlds, with different priorities -- Miller just ignoring the rules and letting the headlong rush of his language propel his writing and Burroughs who (like Howard, who I bet is better but I haven't read enough to say) is just so frickin' excited about this story he has to tell that you don't care that his language is so flat, he hauls you along with such energy.

All that said, I don't think there can be much doubt that Tolkien is a far superior stylist to Jordan. I suspect that Jordan would not dispute that point. I suspect that if you compare the finished writings of both men you would find superior grammar and usage in Tolkien. You would find greater variety of sentence structure, more imaginative metaphor, a far, far broader vocabulary and superior use of poetical devices like scansion and assonance in Tolkien.

Which means nothing when comparing them as "writers", unless you happen to really like that stuff. Which I do, but well, there you go. Nice for me. There are certainly things that Jordan does better, and not all of the things listed above are objectively "better". Jordan uses a smaller vocabulary -- that can be seen as an advantage as much as a disadvantage.  I prefer one to the other, but that preference is purely subjective.

To use textual analysis to "prove" one author is superior to another is impossible. What you CAN do is analyze what an author actually does, and discuss why you do or do not like it, or talk about what you think that might demonstrate as far as the author's point of view, or suggest that it illustrates some particular philosophical notion behind the story -- but to use it to say one writer is simply better than another is kind of pointless. And fraught with difficulty. And unnecessary -- isn't it enough to just say, "I like so-and-so better and here's why" rather than need to say, "So-and-so is BETTER!"  ?

The former is a statement of opinion offered as a point of discussion. The latter is a declaration of faith masquerading as fact in order to stifle discussion. I reckon.


----------



## Dragonblade (Mar 30, 2004)

Taelorn76 said:
			
		

> I really need to go reread book 9 I have no memory of that happening.




Spoilers:

The end of the book features Rand and Nyneave using the Ter'Angreal that let them both draw on the super, big, Sa'Angreal statues that are being unearthed. They use that immense power, directed by Nyneave, since she has the aptitude for healing, to cleanse Saidin. They basically skim the taint off the top and channell it into Shadar Logoth. Destroying both the taint and the city in the process.

They bring friends to protect them though, since a whole bunch of bad guys and Forsaken show up to stop them once they realize what Rand is doing. It was the climax of the book. The coolest scene, IMO, since the Battle of Dumai's Wells in Book 6.

End spoiler.


----------



## KenM (Mar 30, 2004)

I think the comparison will be better when/ if Jordan ever finishes the WoT.


----------



## Taelorn76 (Mar 30, 2004)

Dragonblade said:
			
		

> Spoilers:
> 
> The end of the book features Rand and Nyneave using the Ter'Angreal that let them both draw on the super, big, Sa'Angreal statues that are being unearthed. They use that immense power, directed by Nyneave, since she has the aptitude for healing, to cleanse Saidin. They basically skim the taint off the top and channell it into Shadar Logoth. Destroying both the taint and the city in the process.
> 
> ...





Thanks, I barely remember that though. So I still should go back and read the last few chapters.


----------

