Active Users:360 Time:21/04/2025 09:00:15 AM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Now to me that supports Tom's point about 'reliance theory'. Chas Send a noteboard - 19/09/2009 05:55:28 PM
I don't think many people would be anywhere near as pissed, annoyed or whatever if he didn't keep making statements about when the book is going to be done and published. Case in point the statement referred to here.

GGK wrote an article about this very thing not so long ago. If you're going to engage the fans and promise them things- don't be surprised when there's backlash.


That note in the back of AFFC is the root cause of about 90% of the anger people feel on the issue, and Bantam and Voyager made a mistake in not removing it when AFFC went to paperback or when it went to later printings. I gather that GRRM didn't want to engage in Stalinist revisionising by airbrushing out the statement, but it's simply a factually incorrect piece of information and it was already clearly so when AFFC came out in the first place.


A promise was made. That promise was not kept. And that is further backed up by his feelings on the issue- the only reason he started the series was because of the promise of completion in the near future.
Reply to message
Now I understand why everyone has been bitching about a Dance of Dragons.... DREWRULESWOT! - 18/09/2009 12:36:21 AM 1198 Views
Welcome my son....welcome to the machine...... *NM* Animosity - 18/09/2009 03:06:36 AM 366 Views
lol Nice. *NM* Joker - 20/09/2009 12:28:08 AM 326 Views
It's not just that. He split A Feast for Crows into two. Tom - 18/09/2009 03:10:35 AM 494 Views
Re: It's not just that. He split A Feast for Crows into two. *NM* DREWRULESWOT! - 18/09/2009 04:04:06 AM 402 Views
Titles Werthead - 18/09/2009 04:15:24 AM 463 Views
Ok, Martin is published by Bantam...replace "Tor" with "Bantam" Tom - 18/09/2009 05:43:51 PM 484 Views
Nope, still doesn't work. Werthead - 18/09/2009 08:49:09 PM 456 Views
I would recommend you re-read my post - you're confusing me with someone else Tom - 18/09/2009 10:24:24 PM 419 Views
Re: Nope, still doesn't work. imlad - 18/09/2009 10:46:59 PM 349 Views
Is this the thread in which you'll FINALLY reveal... Joker - 20/09/2009 12:31:49 AM 378 Views
Remember what The Neil said: "GRRM is not your bitch!" *NM* Artsapat - 18/09/2009 07:32:47 AM 369 Views
I don't give a shit what Neil Gaiman thinks Tom - 18/09/2009 05:35:54 PM 376 Views
Gaiman = The Most Overrated Author of the New Milennium. *NM* Joker - 20/09/2009 12:33:10 AM 343 Views
In your opinion, of course. *NM* IndigoAjah - 20/09/2009 01:28:33 AM 334 Views
Yes, and this entire thread deals with opinions. Tom - 20/09/2009 01:52:21 AM 331 Views
I see the reason in that. IndigoAjah - 20/09/2009 02:13:46 AM 515 Views
I haven't even finished reading A Clash of Kings and I'm a touch annoyed by Martin already Brian - 20/09/2009 02:35:32 AM 442 Views
He might be a good comic book author, I don't know Tom - 20/09/2009 03:05:15 AM 396 Views
I see where there might be a misunderstanding. Werthead - 20/09/2009 03:05:24 AM 449 Views
You're the man, Wert. Joker - 20/09/2009 03:29:41 AM 425 Views
I can see my rule of not reading series that have not been finished is paying off. Camilla - 18/09/2009 11:00:37 AM 358 Views
Still ruling WOT, I see. How's that going? *NM* Craig - 18/09/2009 03:26:15 AM 316 Views
Very well, thanks DREWRULESWOT! - 18/09/2009 04:05:16 AM 397 Views
One thing I got to say about Robert Jordan... Crackbrained Asha'man - 18/09/2009 03:40:20 AM 501 Views
Sometimes ... Nate - 18/09/2009 05:07:18 AM 420 Views
I agree! heartbreak - 18/09/2009 01:39:04 PM 411 Views
Sometimes...Neil Gaiman should be thrown into a meat grinder. Tom - 18/09/2009 05:49:56 PM 458 Views
You paid for a product. You got a product. That is the end of the matter in its entirety. Werthead - 18/09/2009 09:03:05 PM 417 Views
Was this well out of line, by any chance? Tom - 18/09/2009 10:25:57 PM 455 Views
damn you are rude *NM* imlad - 18/09/2009 10:51:19 PM 328 Views
Gosh. This is pretty tiring. Tom - 18/09/2009 11:25:51 PM 468 Views
So this guy still hasn't been banned yet, why exactly? Werthead - 19/09/2009 04:13:05 PM 422 Views
For several reasons. *NM* Ghavrel - 19/09/2009 10:15:38 PM 312 Views
Get off your high horse. Someone disagrees with you. Deal with it. *NM* Joker - 20/09/2009 12:35:24 AM 316 Views
No, this guy is breaching the forum rules on attacks and insults. Werthead - 20/09/2009 02:57:20 AM 360 Views
What would you call a good start? Chas - 20/09/2009 03:25:46 AM 347 Views
Oh please. Grow some thicker skin. Joker - 20/09/2009 03:26:33 AM 358 Views
You think this behaviour would have been tolerated on Wotmania? It definitely would not have been. Werthead - 20/09/2009 03:31:20 AM 389 Views
That is factually incorrect. *NM* Chas - 20/09/2009 03:38:06 AM 318 Views
"It" would have been. "It" was. Ghavrel - 20/09/2009 05:45:14 AM 394 Views
Depends on which section of wotmania you're thinking about Larry - 20/09/2009 06:54:00 AM 389 Views
Precisely. *NM* Craig - 20/09/2009 07:30:12 AM 313 Views
I half agree... fionwe1987 - 20/09/2009 04:35:22 AM 376 Views
What's with the ad hominems, Tom? Larry - 20/09/2009 06:57:33 AM 356 Views
Nope, I'm someone simply a hell of a lot better informed about the situation then you. Deal with it. *NM* Werthead - 19/09/2009 02:40:07 AM 342 Views
"Than", not "then". Learn English while you're at it. *NM* Tom - 20/09/2009 01:47:56 AM 341 Views
Irony overdose. Again. Tashmere - 19/09/2009 06:28:49 AM 359 Views
WTF? Tom - 20/09/2009 01:49:23 AM 405 Views
fionwe1987 - 20/09/2009 03:00:53 AM 396 Views
I'd agree with you except for the fact that there was the 'promise'. *NM* Chas - 19/09/2009 05:59:21 PM 273 Views
that would be very counter productive imlad - 18/09/2009 10:50:01 PM 349 Views
Depends on what you want. Tom - 18/09/2009 11:26:54 PM 342 Views
Gaiman would just turn the episode into an amazing graphic novel as he died. *NM* IndigoAjah - 19/09/2009 01:06:30 PM 337 Views
That's the most valid point of the argument. Chas - 18/09/2009 11:54:26 PM 393 Views
Agreed. Werthead - 19/09/2009 03:02:48 AM 375 Views
Now to me that supports Tom's point about 'reliance theory'. Chas - 19/09/2009 05:55:28 PM 397 Views
But a promise was never made. Werthead - 19/09/2009 06:04:55 PM 386 Views
I think we're hung up on the definition of "promise." Craig - 19/09/2009 07:14:30 PM 358 Views
Who is GGK and where is his article? + my opinion on Martin Asharak - 19/09/2009 07:55:01 PM 403 Views
This is where the great divide comes into play Werthead - 19/09/2009 08:10:09 PM 384 Views
I think he should take a page out of RJ's book fionwe1987 - 19/09/2009 08:36:55 PM 420 Views
Excellent point. Werthead - 19/09/2009 10:09:36 PM 371 Views
Re: Excellent point. fionwe1987 - 20/09/2009 12:21:21 AM 388 Views
That would be the best policy. *NM* Chas - 19/09/2009 11:23:48 PM 293 Views
Re: Who is GGK and where is his article? + my opinion on Martin Chas - 19/09/2009 11:22:25 PM 436 Views
Re: I think we're hung up on the definition of "promise." Werthead - 19/09/2009 08:04:53 PM 365 Views
Exceptions prove the rule... Craig - 19/09/2009 08:42:39 PM 349 Views
Re: Exceptions prove the rule... Werthead - 19/09/2009 10:00:35 PM 347 Views
I think we're winding down here. Craig - 20/09/2009 07:41:15 AM 338 Views
Yeah. Chas - 19/09/2009 11:27:04 PM 401 Views
Don't mind me, I just can't post in the right place. *NM* Craig - 19/09/2009 07:13:25 PM 349 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules