I have read lots of fiction - Edit 2
Before modification by Rurouni_Kenshin at 06/06/2010 03:58:08 AM
The reason that I come here is largely by inertia. At wotmania I had stopped going to the WoT board altogether - once I clicked just for fun and it said something like 12,752 new messages since you last viewed this message board.
However, I do want to at least know how it ends. After all, I found the books an interesting diversion through Lord of Chaos. After that it was a boring, fifth-rate diversion. Now, Sanderson has recaptured the spark of the original books and gotten me excited about finding out how it ends.
Defining "serious" literature isn't that hard. It's literature that cuts across genre lines and raises relevant issues about what it means to be human in a way people find aesthetically pleasing.
If you can get people who don't read fantasy to pick up a fantasy book and they uniformly found it meaningful, the book is serious literature. Jordan obviously doesn't qualify.
However, I do want to at least know how it ends. After all, I found the books an interesting diversion through Lord of Chaos. After that it was a boring, fifth-rate diversion. Now, Sanderson has recaptured the spark of the original books and gotten me excited about finding out how it ends.
Defining "serious" literature isn't that hard. It's literature that cuts across genre lines and raises relevant issues about what it means to be human in a way people find aesthetically pleasing.
If you can get people who don't read fantasy to pick up a fantasy book and they uniformly found it meaningful, the book is serious literature. Jordan obviously doesn't qualify.
I have read lots of fiction including serious literature and I don't really agree with you definition of it. There's a lot of "literature that cuts across genre lines and raises relevant issues about what it means to be human" that isn't very aesthetically pleasing (although this is of course subjective) and should be read anyways because of the intellectual value of the work. What you're describing is Great literature and very few books that have ever been written fall under that description. So saying that Jordan's work doesn't qualify under that standard isn't a meaningful criticism to me since by definition that covers 99.99% of books ever written, many of which are a very enjoyable read.
On the character development angle, I that the five main characters (Rand, Mat, Perrin, Nyneave, and Egwene) have all changed a lot. That criticism is valid when aimed cast of thousands that surrounds them, but that's to be expected given the numbers, which in itself is part of the series appeal as an epitome of world building.