Robert Jordan is dead.

we get it, the writing sucks to some of you.. but come on, he is dead.. show some respect atleast.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by rpgcrazied

we get it, the writing sucks to some of you.. but come on, he is dead.. show some respect atleast.

So, because the dude is dead, we can't say we disliked his writing? Man, I'd really like to talk about Stalin's humanitarian violations, but dude is dead. I mean. Show some respect.

How ya doing, buddy?

No one here is really disrespecting the man himself. But anyone who has read his series and the biggest fan of him will know the series itself was in serious decline and quality. His death from what I read sounded very painful physically and a mental level that he was unable to physically write anything for more than a hour a day towards the end. He just is a modern example of what is wrong with the entertainment industry in general with the milking of our dollars. I have many great memories of his earlier books and was the catalyst for my interest in the genre itself. I hope someone will finish his last book and likely now guaranteed with its release to sell more with him dead now than if he was still alive.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Well, if you think that only Tolkien's works should be allowed to exist and no one else should be allowed to write fantasy, then I guess you could complain about Jordan. I just came back from a weekend jaunt to the bookstore and browsed quite a few fantasy novels, and compared to the thousands of hack fantasy books out there, including the myriad world-sharing write-for-hire (not saying those are "de facto" hack works, but many are), Jordan is Shakespeare.

WoT has been enjoyable at times, has dragged on at other times. If book 1 is the Lord of the Rings, book 5 is Dune. Certainly it is somewhat derivative, but at other times it is excitingly original, grasping at genre opportunities that few would dare. I can't imagine what it would feel like to be so close to the conclusion of your life's work, and then pass away just before the conslusion.

I was speaking idiomatically.

No one is saying it should only be Tolkien. A lot of us really like China Miéville, and that man actively wishes Tolkien had never happened. A lot of us really like writers such as Gaiman, Scott Lynch, and Susanna Clarke. Hell, I've read a bunch of the Wheel of Time, and I've read a bunch of Goodkind, and I've read a bunch of Harry Potter. You know what it's taught me? You don't need to be a good writer to be a great success. WoT's failure wasn't that it was derivative, though it clearly was, its failing was that it was simply poorly written. J.K. Rowling is the same deal. Interesting world? Yep. Fun characters? Sure, at time. Utter crap though? You better believe it. Tom Clancy sells millions of copies, and I'd hardly call him Shakespeare. Genre opportunities few would dare? Please. Grow up.

Most amazing jew boots

Man, why can't you give examples - right here - of poorly written passages in such series? Please just quote something that shows these authors' failings as writers.

It's not a dare; I just want to see what you consider bad writing.

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Cellius

Man, why can't you give examples - right here - of poorly written passages in such series? Please just quote something that shows these authors' failings as writers.

It's not a dare; I just want to see what you consider bad writing.

See, the problem with not liking the series is that I don't own the books. All I can tell you is I struggled through the first two, and by book three I closed it 70 pages in because I got tired of the predictable plot and cardboard cut out characters. It felt like reading a Forgotten Realms book.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Originally Posted by Cellius

Man, why can't you give examples - right here - of poorly written passages in such series? Please just quote something that shows these authors' failings as writers.

Sure. Here's an example. Books seven and onwards of the Wheel of Time. The series as a whole is an example of mediocre writing, but that's not a problem for me. I've read other authors whose prose was equally clunky, and I managed to enjoy the stories for what they had to offer. As soon as I started reading the seventh Wheel of Time novel, I realised that they had nothing to offer me any more. Not only was the writing poor, and the characters thin, but the plot no longer had any real coherent structure. It was a holding pattern, because Jordan didn't know what to do next.

I'll give the man credit for spinning a moderately entertaining yarn for six books though. After that, I prefer to just imagine the rest. I apparently have a higher tolerance than Denicalis for poor writing, but not high enough to persist with the Wheel of Time indefinitely while it went nowhere.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Soluzar

Sure. Here's an example. Books seven and onwards of the Wheel of Time.

HAHA!!!! Maybe the aim of my question was for somebody to post some text and examine it to pinpoint why they consider it shitty writing? Or can't you do that? I'm not trying to defend the latter half of the series with this point, but if you're so sure of its decline because of bad writing, you better back it up beyond comments like "durr the whole book lol."

Edit:
Hell, if you want me to, I can grab one of my books and type something up for you to tell everyone why his writing is bad. Until I'm proven otherwise, my feeling is that you simply didn't like the direction the plot was going and blamed Jordan's writing ability.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Cellius

HAHA!!!! Maybe the aim of my question was for somebody to post some text and examine it to pinpoint why they consider it shitty writing? Or can't you do that? I'm not trying to defend the latter half of the series with this point, but if you're so sure of its decline because of bad writing, you better back it up beyond comments like "durr the whole book lol."

Why? The whole book was bad writing. What would be the point in citing a specific passage when there's nothing good about them by that point. It's bad writing to never actually advance the plot. I'm willing to open that up for discussion, if you'd like. Do you believe that a book which doesn't advance the overall plot in any way could be defended as an example of good writing? Do you believe that the concept of 'plot' as expressed through the medium of prose is not a part of the skill of creative writing?

Considering that my paperback edition of A Crown of Swords is 762 pages of densely packed tiny print, it would take me a little longer to criticise the writing on a technical linguistic basis. Considering that I would need to re-read the book in order to do so, I'm not sure if I wish to embark on such a task. Of course I have the ability to do so, but since you have no knowledge of my abilities I will not ask you to take that on trust.

Even if I were to do so, that is only one book from the four which I believe to be representative of the decline of the series. It would be a gargantuan task to fully and completely critique these works, and I have better things to be reading. In any event, your request is predicated upon a false premise. No individual short passage from The Wheel of Time adequately showcases Robert Jordan's shortcomings as an author. In fact it could be said that he has moments where he can produce attractive passages of prose, but this is not the only skill which a writer must master.

The greatest failing of Robert Jordan is one which he shares with the majority of fantasy authors. He is not exceptionally bad when considered in the company of his most immediate contemporaries in the field. I could name several authors whom I believe to be far worse, but that would merely be an unproductive digression. His failing is characterisation. He does not write complete, three-dimensional people, he writes thin, weak characters who can be counted upon to always say and do the same things. In fact, I dare say that a significant portion of any given Wheel of Time novel consists of copy-and-pasted character mannerisms of which the reader will soon tire. Even the hardcore fans complain of the excessive braid-tugging, sniffiing, snorting, and other such examples of by-the-numbers characterisation.

There is not enough variation in the behaviour of Jordan's characters to make them seem entirely fleshed out, in my opinion. It detracts from the story no end when Nynaeve (to name but one) appears to be an automaton with simple buttons which will predictably be pushed by the male characters of the novel to produce equally predictable responses.

This gives me a neat segue into discussing his second major flaw, albeit one which I could justifiably be accused of sharing with him in this post. His prose is unforgivably overblown and florid. If your retort would be that you could easily accuse me of the same thing, I would save your keystrokes. In the first place, I have disarmed you in advance, and in the second, I am no professional writer. I do not earn my crust by producing prose, nor do I live or die by my skill with non-fictional writing. For me writing florid and overblown English is merely a hobby.

This tendancy of Robert Jordan towards the excessively grandiose has a tendancy to weigh down and to bloat his fiction. Can you honestly say that you have never put down one of his books at the end of your reading, and found yourself thinking that he could have cut (on average) one word from every five, and by doing so gain a little in terms of flow and readability? I found myself thinking that every time I read one of his works, even during the days when I was enjoying them greatly.

I also find it unpleasant the way that his prose is liberally peppered with jargon. Of course little of it will be unfamiliar to the long-term reader, but I still would not say that it makes for an easy or pleasant reading experience. I cannot deny the richness of the world that he has created, but it sometimes makes the books a mentally taxing experience. In a similar vein, by the later books he had introduced so many characters that I found that I had simply lost track of most of them. Every time a name was casually dropped into conversation, I would have given myself no better than a 60% chance of remembering who they were, and what was their significance. I almost contemplated making myself a cheat sheet at one stage, but then I decided that was too much work to do in order to enjoy a work of fiction.

It doesn't add to anything if there are so many characters that the average reader cannot recall them all. I am far from the average reader, in any case. I would account my own memory to be far better than average, but still I was overwhelmed by sheer numbers. Even in the early volumes a reader has a great number of names to recall simply counting the Aes Sedai. By the time the Aiel are introduced, it becomes taxing, and in later books there are an almost infinite number of minor noblemen that each seem to have their own tiny role in the story.

Last but not least I must return to the plot. I can see where you're coming from with your arguments. The quality of the plot is to some degree subjective, but not entirely so. If you have ever read the usenet discussion group which is/was dedicated to discussion of Robert Jordan's works, you would certainly recall the protracted discussions regarding the identity of Asmodean's killer. There are/were some fine minds in that newsgroup, and the consensus that was reached was that there seems to be no existing character who should be considered the obvious supect to have murdered Asmodean, given the constraints of the plot, the abilities of the various characters, and their presumed motives. Robert Jordan maintained until his death that the fan community have enough information to work that one out for themselves, and that it should be perfectly clear. Personally I think he had no idea of his own who the murderer was, and never bothered to think it through.

That aside, I can only repeat that I hold the complete lack of advancement in the plot as being evidence of his poor writing. There have been new plot threads introduced, and since resolved. This is not the same thing as genuine plot advancement. We are at volume seven of an ongoing series, and there are dangling threads left, right, and center. Was it too much to ask that over the course of four books at least some of them might move towards resolution? How long have we been waiting for the climactic battle between the rebel Aes Sedai and the White Tower? How long is reasonable to wait, while the characters in question take endless baths instead?

Originally Posted by Cellius

Hell, if you want me to, I can grab one of my books and type something up for you to tell everyone why his writing is bad.

Thank you, but that will not be necessary. I have my books close to hand, if I wish to cite them. In the unlikely event that I do, I will use a passage of my own choosing. I prefer to simply discuss the books, since that does not raise the unpleasant prospect of being called upon to read them.

Quote:

Until I'm proven otherwise, my feeling is that you simply didn't like the direction the plot was going and blamed Jordan's writing ability.

The plot wasn't going in any direction. Around and around in circles is not a direction.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Is there a "nomination" feature on this board? Because I'd certainly do that for the above.

Can't really put it better than that. Especially about Asmodean's killler. "Intuitively obvious", my ass. And his lame characters and random name-dropping... infuriating and serves no purpose except to pretend he knew what he was doing. I really doubt he was.

How ya doing, buddy?

Well Soluzar I appreciate your thorough and well-thought out response; it clarified extremely well your stance and I'm sure Denicallis's as well. Can't help but agree with most of it.

I was speaking idiomatically.

I hope I’m not breathing new life into a dead discussion but I don’t check these boards as often as I once did.


While Wheel of Time will always hold a special place in my own personal library, like almost everybody else, I became increasingly disappointed with each additional book starting around Crown of Swords. Anyhow, I never understood how people could criticize Jordan’s work and then turn around and praise Tolkein. The third Lord of the Rings book is one of the few I could not bring myself to finish.

Quote:

The greatest failing of Robert Jordan is one which he shares with the majority of fantasy authors. He is not exceptionally bad when considered in the company of his most immediate contemporaries in the field. I could name several authors whom I believe to be far worse, but that would merely be an unproductive digression. His failing is characterisation. He does not write complete, three-dimensional people, he writes thin, weak characters who can be counted upon to always say and do the same things.

How is The Lord of the Rings any different? I'd say it takes the cake as far as poor chracters goes.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by VitaPup

While Wheel of Time will always hold a special place in my own personal library, like almost everybody else, I became increasingly disappointed with each additional book starting around Crown of Swords.

Right at the start of this discussion, we agree. That's worth bearing in mind, since we aren't really arguing here.

Quote:

Anyhow, I never understood how people could criticize Jordan’s work and then turn around and praise Tolkein. The third Lord of the Rings book is one of the few I could not bring myself to finish.

Where did you see me praise Tolkien? I don't remember doing that, so let's not put any words in my mouth. I would say that Tolkien scores over Jordan because he actually has a coherent plot which is resolved in a relatively timely manner. It could probably have been wrapped up in a lot less than three volumes, but at least it didn't take twelve. Jordan could have finished story in about that many volumes, if he wanted to. Maybe six if he'd wanted to push the boat out a little. Twelve is just taking the piss.

Quote:

How is The Lord of the Rings any different? I'd say it takes the cake as far as poor chracters goes.

I agree completely. The characters from Lord of the Rings are the weakest part about the book. The main achievement of the films was that Peter Jackson and his cast actually managed to make the paper-thin characters seem like they had more about them than just perfunctory plot necessity.

The books manage to tell a good story, but only just. The strength of the plot is such that most readers will ignore the flaws such as characterisation. That can't be said for The Wheel of Time, post A Crown of Swords.

FELIPE NO

I started rereading The Eye of the World. It's been about 5-6 years; I'm surprised at how much I've forgotten. The mystery aspect is really what drives this first novel forward, but yeah, we're not really embarking on any strong characters here. But I DO enjoy some of the writing, to be really honest.

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by Cellius

But I DO enjoy some of the writing, to be really honest.

I'd agree that some of it is good. With a decent editor, these books could have been a lot better. Someone just needed to attack that book with scissors and they'd finish up with a better book that was about a third as long.

Jam it back in, in the dark.