[Matrim]

Richard, the only area in which you will probably find improvement in the later books is number five.
The "war of sexes" still rages in book 5 and men are still just as spineless as in the beginning and the women just as arrogant. Point number three is Jordan's favorite plot device, if his characters ever told each other anything important, the series would have been over a decade ago. And yes, the detailed description of each and every innkeeper is essential in WoT.
I still like WoT, don't ask me why, it's very irrational feeling. Anyway, after seeing that list I strongly advise you to abandon the Wheel of Time and move on to something more to your taste.

[Nazaar]

I've read WoT a fair bit, the first few books several times, by necessity. I started the series just after LoC came out, so every time a new one came out, a reread. As someone has said, that's part of it. My dislike for the series isn't based on popularity. Apart from the occasional foray into messageboards, I don't really talk to other fantasy readers much. I'm not going to buy any more books until he finishes the series, if he ever manages it. I'll probably just borrow them from a library if he finishes it.

Jordan, imho, has bitten off more than he can chew.

My issues with him.

Talent in epic writing: If you're going to write a 10-15 book epic, you need to be able to reach conclusions, in some way. Waypoints on the journey. The main issue in this regard with Jordan is that the only conclusions he reaches tend to be momentary, if they exist at all. Books often end with battles, fine, but little, if anything, is resolved. Characters die, to be resurrected in the next book.

Take Erikson as an example. Each book he writes is a story in it's own right. There is an ognoing major plotline, but the middling storylines are resolved. Gains are continually made in the revelation, and the progression, of the major plotline as well. Jordan resolves very little of anything other than the minor plots. In regards to the major plotline, ie. the war against shadow or whatever, he has effectively stalled. People buy the next book because the last one didn't tell them anything about the big issues. This is not the sign of a skilled writer of epic fantasy. This is good for a TV series where you wait till next week, but not when you have to wait 2 years between books.

Character potrayal : I'm willing to admit that the characters themselves can actually be quite different, but the mannerisms are ridiculous. The male/female relationships are one dimensional. He simply cannot write romance, or male/female interactions on a sexual level. Compare to Erikson: we have no idea if he's skilled at writing romantic stuff, because he doesn't try. Realistically this is the main source of annoyance for his characterisation.

Scope: Frankly he's over-reached himself again. He's trying to give an impression of ancient civilisations reaching back into the mists of time, and I don't think it works for him. Tolkien wrote whole languages for his books. The Silmarillion was never intended to be published, it's a summary of all his notes that he wrote for the backstory of his books. Erikson play tested his world for years, and wrote about it, and you get the feeling it's there if he wants it.

Originality of concepts: imho he's actually pretty good when it comes to the overlying fantasy stuff, like the magic system, the Ways, Dreamworld etc. That gets him a few points. The farmboy-with-a-greater-destiny thing is old though, and we have three of them!

Battles: the battles are some of the best bits. He does these well, and it's interesting to see his take on how magic would affect large scale battles.

So basically he has talent, but imho it's nowhere near the talent that he needs to pull off what he's attempting.

quote:

---

I think a new defense I might take up for Robert Jordan is asking all the people who are critisizing him some of the authors that they enjoy reading.

---

Lots of them. 'old school' writers like Lieber, Moorecock, Zelazny, Tolkien of course, more modern ones like Gemmel, Lackey, McCaffrey, GRRM, Cook, Brust, Pratchett.

Each of them has their place. Gemmel couldn't write anything epic-scale with any success at all imho, but he's near the pinnacle of heroic fantasy. Lackey would be similarly bad, but writes animal-centric stuff fabulously. Cook is great for battles and looking at the darker side of human nature, pure 'the world in greyscale'. Brust writes detective/swashbuckling fun stories, with some interesting statements on humans. Pratchett is pure comedy. They all know their strengths and stick to them...