Active Users:1211 Time:23/11/2024 07:08:49 AM
Actually, aSoIaF has one of the more accurate depictions of feudalism in modern fantasy. - Edit 1

Before modification by Ghavrel at 08/01/2010 07:33:30 PM

Erikson has claimed Martin as an influence in some of his approach, but more in opening the door to certain types of characterization in the treatment of one's characters. In the same way, Bakker has claimed both Martin and Erikson as influences/ground breakers for they direction of fantasy in terms of style, approach, and tone.

Dunno about Bakker, but what kind of influence can Erikson claim about characterization? They're D&D cutouts, best depicted by their one line descriptions in his Dramatis Personae.
As the aim of these authors was to make a point about Martin's characterization and the impact it has had on the genre, they might have chosen a better example than Erikson to make their point.
As for Jordan, he developed one of the more entertaining fantasy series of the last 40 years. However, his characterizations are most often 'wafer thin' and extremely stereotypical of the genre.

And the example they used proved that? How is braid tugging even related to characterization? That's like saying a beautiful smile is "characterization".
And Nynaeve is not wafer thin. Are many of the tertiary characters, especially the Aes Sedai, thinly veiled variations of a prototype? Yes. Is that the attribute of the major characters and hence the series, not at all.
The setting is typical fantasy scape. I can quote dozens of fantasy worlds that have near identical set up, history, political situations. Sure, the details differ, but the underpinning themes and style is the same.

But they are not! Martin's pseudo-feudal society is far more common that RJ's regressing Renaissance era world. Not to mention the female dominated world and the far ranging consequences this has on Jordan's world. Hardly typical.
I don't understand why people try to make Jordan into a Master writer of some supreme Literature. He wrote a dang fine entertaining blockbuster... it's equivalent to a great popcorn flick. Enjoy it for what it is. Don't try to stretch it into what it isn't.

And I don't understand why self styled literary critics will insist that novels that are primarily entertaining cannot contains deeper themes and elements that deserve praise. No one is claiming Jordan is the second coming of Doestoevsky!

Return to message