I personally see it as more of RJ being a fantastic story teller, but not a well structured writer.
darius_sedai Send a noteboard - 21/02/2011 06:44:21 PM
It's like he was telling a story, that is rich and entertaining, but he wandered through the process and got bogged down in places or simply trailed off in others.
Generally people seem to want a more linear storyline ... Introduce the hero, put him in danger, have him save the day. RJ didn't structure the books that way, at least not clearly, and it allowed for many random plots that didn't really drive the story. I guess what I'm getting at is that it would be like someone trying to tell you the story of Jack and the Beanstalk but weaves Little Red Riding Hood and the 3 Little Pigs into the story because they think those stories will weave a better overall story for you, and then they also explain that in the timeframe of LRRH young girls often wore this type of garment and that wolves often eat pigs and that gold is valuable... Instead of giving you a clear story, you end up get confused by all the random detail that doesn't really contribute to the original story.
RJ is usually critiqued for being long winded and overly detailed ... Do we really need to know what some AS, whose name we don't even know, is wearing on a given day? Do we need to read about every floor tile in the friggin White Tower?
Like you I have a soft spot for the subject... I've been reading it since EoTW was first published and have never missed a new release of any of the books... I'm used to it and have come to expect it as part of the story. In fact I find Sanderson too bare in those random details and find myself thinking that he's not really telling the story the right way. RJ was no literary genius, but he was telling us his story in his way. People who criticize that can just keep on bitching... It's not like RJ was out to win the Pulitzer!
Generally people seem to want a more linear storyline ... Introduce the hero, put him in danger, have him save the day. RJ didn't structure the books that way, at least not clearly, and it allowed for many random plots that didn't really drive the story. I guess what I'm getting at is that it would be like someone trying to tell you the story of Jack and the Beanstalk but weaves Little Red Riding Hood and the 3 Little Pigs into the story because they think those stories will weave a better overall story for you, and then they also explain that in the timeframe of LRRH young girls often wore this type of garment and that wolves often eat pigs and that gold is valuable... Instead of giving you a clear story, you end up get confused by all the random detail that doesn't really contribute to the original story.
RJ is usually critiqued for being long winded and overly detailed ... Do we really need to know what some AS, whose name we don't even know, is wearing on a given day? Do we need to read about every floor tile in the friggin White Tower?
Like you I have a soft spot for the subject... I've been reading it since EoTW was first published and have never missed a new release of any of the books... I'm used to it and have come to expect it as part of the story. In fact I find Sanderson too bare in those random details and find myself thinking that he's not really telling the story the right way. RJ was no literary genius, but he was telling us his story in his way. People who criticize that can just keep on bitching... It's not like RJ was out to win the Pulitzer!
Domani Drag Queen in the White Tower ... Aran'gar watch out!
Can someone explain to me how Jordan is not a particularly good writer?
- 21/02/2011 05:41:31 PM
3549 Views
I personally see it as more of RJ being a fantastic story teller, but not a well structured writer.
- 21/02/2011 06:44:21 PM
1979 Views
Re: I personally see it as more of RJ being a fantastic story teller, but not a well structured
- 22/02/2011 10:59:25 PM
1648 Views
What do you think about the Southern Gothic authors?
- 23/02/2011 08:08:26 AM
1479 Views
Re: What do you think about the Southern Gothic authors?
- 23/02/2011 10:51:57 AM
1553 Views
For the same reason that most people think they have above average intelligence.
- 21/02/2011 11:13:34 PM
1969 Views
Re: For the same reason that most people think they have above average intelligence. *NM*
- 22/02/2011 02:39:20 PM
1131 Views
Re: For the same reason that most people think they have above average intelligence.
- 22/02/2011 02:41:37 PM
1479 Views
That's possibly the best explanation of literary criticism I've ever seen.
- 23/02/2011 02:47:12 AM
1524 Views
I can take a shot at that, since nobody else seems willing to.
- 22/02/2011 07:29:20 AM
2047 Views
- 22/02/2011 07:29:20 AM
2047 Views
Re: I can take a shot at that, since nobody else seems willing to.
- 22/02/2011 11:23:38 PM
1679 Views
- 22/02/2011 11:23:38 PM
1679 Views
That has very little to do with anything unless you can provide a real-world analogy to a channeler.
- 22/02/2011 11:30:52 PM
1538 Views
Re: That has very little to do with anything unless you can provide a real-world analogy to a
- 23/02/2011 12:02:24 AM
1553 Views
As far as I'm concerned, the only way to gauge whether an author is good or not is ...
- 22/02/2011 03:58:17 PM
1590 Views
Re: Can someone explain to me how Jordan is not a particularly good writer?
- 22/02/2011 06:27:11 PM
2604 Views
I think it has more to do with limitations imposed by how the story was organized and edited.
- 22/02/2011 07:50:18 PM
1876 Views
That's interesting, and I have a weird agree/disagree here; also, that Adam Roberts sucks
- 23/02/2011 02:15:12 AM
1647 Views
Re: That's interesting, and I have a weird agree/disagree here; also, that Adam Roberts sucks
- 23/02/2011 11:02:14 AM
1593 Views
adam roberts reviews
- 23/02/2011 03:53:49 AM
1746 Views
And I suspect those who prefer the BS books are those who largely read WoT for the story. *NM*
- 23/02/2011 08:06:16 AM
994 Views
Oh GAWD!... not another pointer to Robert Adam's incoherant muckraking
- 24/02/2011 07:47:35 PM
1490 Views
I think DomA answered the question best, but the "do you like it" argument is weak.
- 22/02/2011 10:32:51 PM
1981 Views
Re: I think DomA answered the question best, but the "do you like it" argument is weak.
- 22/02/2011 11:16:24 PM
1831 Views
The Necronomicon isn't actually a book, you know.
*NM*
- 22/02/2011 11:28:29 PM
923 Views
*NM*
- 22/02/2011 11:28:29 PM
923 Views
There are nine, actually...
- 23/02/2011 12:04:55 AM
1777 Views
Lovecraft's Necronomicon was fictitious. If you want to count fanfiction, fine. *NM*
- 23/02/2011 12:38:07 AM
991 Views
Based on how poorly worded that response was, I'm not sure what to think of it. *NM*
- 23/02/2011 12:13:00 AM
999 Views
I hope I am misunderstanding you.
- 23/02/2011 10:57:47 PM
1422 Views
Re: I hope I am misunderstanding you.
- 24/02/2011 10:41:09 AM
1576 Views
If the core of the story is all that matters, why read a book
- 24/02/2011 10:32:01 PM
1521 Views
Re: If the core of the story is all that matters, why read a book
- 24/02/2011 11:23:42 PM
1563 Views
So wait, style is good?
- 25/02/2011 12:32:07 AM
1807 Views
That depends...
- 23/02/2011 03:00:35 AM
1706 Views
I didn't say aesthetics was the primary criterion. I named three criteria.
- 23/02/2011 05:39:03 AM
1584 Views
the "do you like it" is the most important criterion
- 23/02/2011 10:45:17 PM
1543 Views
If you don't mind me asking...
- 24/02/2011 01:05:12 AM
1525 Views
I don't mind that you ask, but I'm not going to engage in a defense of literature.
- 24/02/2011 05:35:27 PM
1455 Views
Re: I don't mind that you ask, but I'm not going to engage in a defense of literature.
- 24/02/2011 11:26:55 PM
1501 Views
I'm sure you have a wonderful job awaiting in fast food service.
- 25/02/2011 01:57:15 AM
1566 Views
Re: I'm sure you have a wonderful job awaiting in fast food service.
- 25/02/2011 08:56:06 AM
1514 Views
...
- 25/02/2011 01:07:22 AM
1411 Views
It is not a serious question.
- 25/02/2011 01:53:59 AM
1598 Views
Is that so?
- 25/02/2011 05:58:31 AM
1765 Views
I'm not fixated with Jordan.
- 25/02/2011 03:13:56 PM
1521 Views
Then why do you keep trying to qualify the passage in relation to him?
- 25/02/2011 06:29:31 PM
1552 Views
You're conflating two things.
- 25/02/2011 07:32:59 PM
1701 Views
All right, now we're getting somewhere.
- 26/02/2011 12:40:57 AM
1556 Views
Okay, here you go. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt as to your sincerity.
- 26/02/2011 03:20:44 PM
1375 Views
Thank you, and I agree with all your explanations. *NM*
- 26/02/2011 07:28:09 PM
874 Views
No, it is a serious question, just one that can never be seriously answered.
- 25/02/2011 03:28:48 PM
1609 Views
Your opinion isn't as valid as anyone else's if that's your opinion.
- 25/02/2011 04:44:57 PM
1693 Views
Re: Your opinion isn't as valid as anyone else's if that's your opinion.
- 25/02/2011 06:05:18 PM
1989 Views
I'm not wasting my time proving something to an internet moron and troll like you.
- 25/02/2011 07:36:19 PM
1420 Views
Ah yes, the wonderful "dissmiss the person who disagrees with me by insulting him tactic"
- 28/02/2011 02:30:35 PM
1399 Views
Re: Your opinion isn't as valid as anyone else's if that's your opinion.
- 26/02/2011 11:06:26 AM
1387 Views
Re: I find this whole thing elitist and more than a bit silly
- 23/02/2011 06:45:05 AM
1768 Views
Why do you think mind-expanding literature is restricted to the classics?
- 23/02/2011 08:03:59 AM
1412 Views
Re: Why do you think mind-expanding literature is restricted to the classics?
- 23/02/2011 09:25:10 AM
1580 Views
Of course people read for pleasure.
- 23/02/2011 09:04:24 PM
1464 Views
Ok...
- 24/02/2011 08:59:27 AM
1462 Views
"Yeah well, that's, like, just your opinion, man." Good argument.
- 24/02/2011 03:43:24 PM
1584 Views
I'm curious to hear who Tom and DomA consider a "very good writer"?
- 24/02/2011 05:49:13 PM
1576 Views
Among living writers?
- 24/02/2011 08:16:08 PM
1642 Views
My list would be similar...
- 26/02/2011 07:24:11 AM
1738 Views
That was a very good list.
- 26/02/2011 03:07:31 PM
1674 Views
Re: That was a very good list.
- 27/02/2011 04:51:43 AM
1642 Views
Oh, and another question
- 27/02/2011 05:28:47 PM
1284 Views
Re: Oh, and another question
- 01/03/2011 03:42:02 AM
1590 Views
I think the two of you have taken too narrow a meaning of 'great'
- 27/02/2011 11:14:30 AM
1737 Views
Re: I think the two of you have taken too narrow a meaning of 'great'
- 28/02/2011 11:51:49 PM
1647 Views
Re: I think the two of you have taken too narrow a meaning of 'great'
- 03/03/2011 12:01:30 AM
1623 Views
Re: I think the two of you have taken too narrow a meaning of 'great'
- 03/03/2011 02:17:06 PM
1555 Views
He's a great storyteller, but his prose is somewhat uninspiring. *NM*
- 27/02/2011 07:28:00 PM
1015 Views

*NM*