We (you, me & RJ) agree that it would be best to reveal it in the killer's PoV
Etzel Send a noteboard - 14/11/2009 06:40:33 PM
I don't see as how RJ's original probable intent matters a whole lot in the discussion. I agree that an Asmo-killer pov would be best, but I can't agree that it will be the method.
Because it obviously would have a more powerful impact. If Graendal was the killer, BS just had the chance to reveal it in her PoV in TGS, prologue. Why then, should he skip this opportunity to let it e.g. Moridin tell someone else that Graendal did it? Makes no sense.
And I actually bet that no one, who thought Graendal did it, even considered the possibilty before TGS that the revelation won't be in Graendal's PoV. The idea that a third person will reveal the killer is just an attempt to rescue a wrong theory. Graendaldunnit is as dead as Graendal, IMO.
Another blow to the Graendaldunnit-theory
14/11/2009 10:41:32 AM
- 1175 Views
I don't see any reason the Graendal theory is wrong from that.
14/11/2009 02:53:25 PM
- 620 Views
He has stated that they will put the mystery to rest in the final books...
14/11/2009 04:02:53 PM
- 729 Views
I actually figured a way that this could come up quite naturally without Graendal
14/11/2009 04:11:24 PM
- 737 Views
RJ said it will probably revealed in the killer's PoV
14/11/2009 04:46:20 PM
- 573 Views
And Brandon said Harriet gave him the freedom to tell the story as he wishes.
14/11/2009 06:05:40 PM
- 542 Views
We (you, me & RJ) agree that it would be best to reveal it in the killer's PoV
14/11/2009 06:40:33 PM
- 550 Views
Wait...wait...this is funny.
20/11/2009 02:05:26 AM
- 464 Views
I often explained it, because many don't seem to get it
20/11/2009 12:17:21 PM
- 419 Views
So maybe Graendal didn't care enough about Asmodean, either.
20/11/2009 02:07:02 PM
- 446 Views
Neither Graendal nor Slayer mention killing Asmo...
20/11/2009 02:46:40 PM
- 593 Views
It seems you think I don't read any posts and you certainly haven't read this board much.
14/11/2009 04:30:06 PM
- 520 Views
That's wrong
14/11/2009 04:45:02 PM
- 639 Views
Not one word of what I wrote is wrong.
15/11/2009 01:41:18 AM
- 531 Views
right here
15/11/2009 03:04:57 AM
- 512 Views
If Graendal's name is mentioned, then "Graendal" is in the book. *NM*
15/11/2009 12:13:57 PM
- 234 Views
BS just said that Graendal will be mentioned, not appear as a character in ToM. *NM*
15/11/2009 09:58:53 AM
- 224 Views
BS never would have figured it out himself that Graendal did it? *NM*
14/11/2009 05:20:19 PM
- 225 Views
Re: I don't see any reason the Graendal theory is wrong from that.
19/11/2009 12:07:25 AM
- 730 Views
I don't agree with this interpretation at all - your grasping for straws...
14/11/2009 07:34:58 PM
- 521 Views
Only if you make the assumption that she was the most obvious to Sanderson.
14/11/2009 07:37:39 PM
- 582 Views
No. Try again.
14/11/2009 11:35:59 PM
- 597 Views
Ok, I will stay alert for further blows to Graendaldunnit, if this didn't already convince you! *NM*
15/11/2009 10:02:26 AM
- 217 Views
Actually this is more against the Slayer theory
15/11/2009 01:49:08 PM
- 513 Views
Nonsense...
15/11/2009 02:06:04 PM
- 489 Views
Your tenacity is impressive.
15/11/2009 03:14:50 PM
- 544 Views
Absolut statements in such discussions...
15/11/2009 03:53:22 PM
- 471 Views
Re: Absolut statements in such discussions...
15/11/2009 05:57:25 PM
- 427 Views