Posted by Sometime Player on April 10, 2000 at 14:07:21:
In Reply to: Narev is a communist (and other entertaining truths) posted by Grallon on April 10, 2000 at 13:44:25:
Well, I don't know about Narev, but you're extremely wrong in your defense of Robert Jordan, who *is* a pretty poor writer.
Well, duh. Tolkien obviously owes a great deal to Western literary tradition. What you seem to ignore are the truly blatant thefts-of-idea perpetrated by Robert Jordan. Ogiers? Big, forest-dwelling folk who avoid being "hasty"? Aiel? I was half expecting one of them to refer to Rand as "Muad'dib".
> What Jordan has done...what so many other Fantasy writers has failed to do since tolkein, is come up with an Original STORY to go along with these forms and base plot.
What original STORY are you talking about here? The first two books were vaguely interesting, but the last five have basically gone into a holding pattern:
Rand conquers another nation
Rand bitches about not wanting all this power
[insert female character] folds her arms over her breasts
[insert male character] blushes
Some Darkfriend does something nasty
Lather, rinse, repeat.
> And yes, His literary control and command is sometimes a bit overburdening to those in for a quick fix...wich is why I assume you do not think he is a good writer...You are looking for popcorn, and he is giving you Fillet Mignon.
Maybe he's looking for popcorn, but RJ's giving us *stale* popcorn.
> Are the literary forms Jordan uses new and unique? No. Were they new and unique when tolkein used them? Not by a Long shot. Does Jordan's story contain unique plot devolopements and story twists? Yes.
See above. I quit reading the series, but I wasn't been surprised by much of anything.
> Does Jordan possess a unique ability to show you both a female and male take on the same story? Yes.
No. His female characters are frighteningly one-dimensional. They're either pure innocents or slightly bitchy, sarcastic women with a soft heart under their callous exterior. Egwene and Elayne are basically exactly the same person.
> Does this make Jordan a tolkein ripoff?
Yes.
> Does Jordan Surpass tolkein in the amount of depth he goes into behind the actual drives, motivations, and desires of EVERY character he think up? By far.
Insofar as none of his characters seem to have more than one motivation, I guess.
> In Short,For you to say that the Eye of the world, and the following 8 books, are a blatant ripoff of tolkein is to prove that you just didnt get it, and it went over your head.
My, that's a long sentence. Can you be any more condescending?
> Hell, to say that Jordan is a Tolkein ripoff, is just you showing your desire to parade your limited knowledge of the history, forms, and evolution of Literature, in an effort to sound important...for eveyone knows that a critic with a half formed argument sounds more important than a supporter with a wellformed, fact-based argument...
Apparently, you can be more condescending. Impressive. What you seem to miss here is that it's a DIFFERENCE OF OPINION. And a frighteningly defensible one, at that.
> It's Ok, narev, We forgive you.
And now you're using the royal "we". You win, dude.
> This has turned into a ramble,
No kidding.
> I could continue to dazzle myself with examples and stories backing up the point of view that Jordan is NOT just a hack...but that would get boring for you.
*wild applause*
--sp