Active Users:659 Time:30/10/2026 04:15:35 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 1311 Views
Welcome my son....welcome to the machine...... *NM* Animosity - 18/09/2009 03:06:36 AM 471 Views
lol Nice. *NM* Joker - 20/09/2009 12:28:08 AM 460 Views
It's not just that. He split A Feast for Crows into two. Tom - 18/09/2009 03:10:35 AM 600 Views
Re: It's not just that. He split A Feast for Crows into two. *NM* DREWRULESWOT! - 18/09/2009 04:04:06 AM 507 Views
Titles Werthead - 18/09/2009 04:15:24 AM 558 Views
Ok, Martin is published by Bantam...replace "Tor" with "Bantam" Tom - 18/09/2009 05:43:51 PM 604 Views
Nope, still doesn't work. Werthead - 18/09/2009 08:49:09 PM 583 Views
I would recommend you re-read my post - you're confusing me with someone else Tom - 18/09/2009 10:24:24 PM 531 Views
Re: Nope, still doesn't work. imlad - 18/09/2009 10:46:59 PM 449 Views
Is this the thread in which you'll FINALLY reveal... Joker - 20/09/2009 12:31:49 AM 480 Views
Remember what The Neil said: "GRRM is not your bitch!" *NM* Artsapat - 18/09/2009 07:32:47 AM 521 Views
I don't give a shit what Neil Gaiman thinks Tom - 18/09/2009 05:35:54 PM 474 Views
Gaiman = The Most Overrated Author of the New Milennium. *NM* Joker - 20/09/2009 12:33:10 AM 446 Views
In your opinion, of course. *NM* IndigoAjah - 20/09/2009 01:28:33 AM 453 Views
Yes, and this entire thread deals with opinions. Tom - 20/09/2009 01:52:21 AM 425 Views
I see the reason in that. IndigoAjah - 20/09/2009 02:13:46 AM 627 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 543 Views
He might be a good comic book author, I don't know Tom - 20/09/2009 03:05:15 AM 502 Views
I see where there might be a misunderstanding. Werthead - 20/09/2009 03:05:24 AM 547 Views
You're the man, Wert. Joker - 20/09/2009 03:29:41 AM 532 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 460 Views
Still ruling WOT, I see. How's that going? *NM* Craig - 18/09/2009 03:26:15 AM 425 Views
Very well, thanks DREWRULESWOT! - 18/09/2009 04:05:16 AM 500 Views
One thing I got to say about Robert Jordan... Crackbrained Asha'man - 18/09/2009 03:40:20 AM 609 Views
Sometimes ... Nate - 18/09/2009 05:07:18 AM 531 Views
I agree! heartbreak - 18/09/2009 01:39:04 PM 511 Views
Sometimes...Neil Gaiman should be thrown into a meat grinder. Tom - 18/09/2009 05:49:56 PM 587 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 531 Views
Was this well out of line, by any chance? Tom - 18/09/2009 10:25:57 PM 559 Views
damn you are rude *NM* imlad - 18/09/2009 10:51:19 PM 440 Views
Gosh. This is pretty tiring. Tom - 18/09/2009 11:25:51 PM 621 Views
So this guy still hasn't been banned yet, why exactly? Werthead - 19/09/2009 04:13:05 PM 557 Views
For several reasons. *NM* Ghavrel - 19/09/2009 10:15:38 PM 417 Views
Get off your high horse. Someone disagrees with you. Deal with it. *NM* Joker - 20/09/2009 12:35:24 AM 475 Views
No, this guy is breaching the forum rules on attacks and insults. Werthead - 20/09/2009 02:57:20 AM 486 Views
What would you call a good start? Chas - 20/09/2009 03:25:46 AM 473 Views
Oh please. Grow some thicker skin. Joker - 20/09/2009 03:26:33 AM 465 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 508 Views
That is factually incorrect. *NM* Chas - 20/09/2009 03:38:06 AM 413 Views
"It" would have been. "It" was. Ghavrel - 20/09/2009 05:45:14 AM 495 Views
Depends on which section of wotmania you're thinking about Larry - 20/09/2009 06:54:00 AM 501 Views
Precisely. *NM* Craig - 20/09/2009 07:30:12 AM 418 Views
I half agree... fionwe1987 - 20/09/2009 04:35:22 AM 481 Views
What's with the ad hominems, Tom? Larry - 20/09/2009 06:57:33 AM 456 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 448 Views
"Than", not "then". Learn English while you're at it. *NM* Tom - 20/09/2009 01:47:56 AM 444 Views
Irony overdose. Again. Tashmere - 19/09/2009 06:28:49 AM 482 Views
WTF? Tom - 20/09/2009 01:49:23 AM 513 Views
fionwe1987 - 20/09/2009 03:00:53 AM 511 Views
I'd agree with you except for the fact that there was the 'promise'. *NM* Chas - 19/09/2009 05:59:21 PM 399 Views
that would be very counter productive imlad - 18/09/2009 10:50:01 PM 453 Views
Depends on what you want. Tom - 18/09/2009 11:26:54 PM 442 Views
Gaiman would just turn the episode into an amazing graphic novel as he died. *NM* IndigoAjah - 19/09/2009 01:06:30 PM 459 Views
That's the most valid point of the argument. Chas - 18/09/2009 11:54:26 PM 506 Views
Agreed. Werthead - 19/09/2009 03:02:48 AM 488 Views
Now to me that supports Tom's point about 'reliance theory'. Chas - 19/09/2009 05:55:28 PM 497 Views
But a promise was never made. Werthead - 19/09/2009 06:04:55 PM 483 Views
I think we're hung up on the definition of "promise." Craig - 19/09/2009 07:14:30 PM 458 Views
Who is GGK and where is his article? + my opinion on Martin Asharak - 19/09/2009 07:55:01 PM 512 Views
This is where the great divide comes into play Werthead - 19/09/2009 08:10:09 PM 484 Views
I think he should take a page out of RJ's book fionwe1987 - 19/09/2009 08:36:55 PM 521 Views
Excellent point. Werthead - 19/09/2009 10:09:36 PM 613 Views
Re: Excellent point. fionwe1987 - 20/09/2009 12:21:21 AM 504 Views
That would be the best policy. *NM* Chas - 19/09/2009 11:23:48 PM 406 Views
Re: Who is GGK and where is his article? + my opinion on Martin Chas - 19/09/2009 11:22:25 PM 547 Views
Re: I think we're hung up on the definition of "promise." Werthead - 19/09/2009 08:04:53 PM 481 Views
Exceptions prove the rule... Craig - 19/09/2009 08:42:39 PM 461 Views
Re: Exceptions prove the rule... Werthead - 19/09/2009 10:00:35 PM 479 Views
I think we're winding down here. Craig - 20/09/2009 07:41:15 AM 478 Views
Yeah. Chas - 19/09/2009 11:27:04 PM 506 Views
Don't mind me, I just can't post in the right place. *NM* Craig - 19/09/2009 07:13:25 PM 452 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules