I don't seem to recall any discussions of burning people at the stake in any of Roberts' posts. I would say that, mocking or not, that such a comment goes quite a bit beyond satire and toward the sort of comment that some of Terry Goodkind's more deluded fanatics have posted over the years.
No, there were no such comments in the blog. But then, I don't think Sidious meant any of it literally.
And in no way is this in anyway reminiscent of Mystar and his ilk. It is quite obvious that Sidious criticizes RJ for several things, including some things on which Adam Roberts would likely agree. He's far from a fan-boy.
As for your opinions on this, well...things do go more than one way.
Of course. Yet that kind of understanding has been completely lacking in Roberts' own posts about the series. The best he could come up with is that people liked the books for their length and the comfort that offered. I didn't see you take exception to that...
I don't think "condescending" is the word to use here. When I originally posted this thread, it was to see what discussion might occur out of it, in the now vain hope that it'd be more substantive than what has been produced. So yes, after a while, the circular nature of the arguments on all sides (I didn't exclude myself from that comment, after all) became repetitive and I mostly just posted the links out of habit than anything else.
Your initial motives are not the issue here. You say you found the discussion here circular. It was clear people here found the discussion in the blog tasteless and stupid. What could possibly be the point of posting links from each place in the other except to stoke up the heat?
By itself, that isn't even objectionable.
No, it's not hypocritical when I've been quite open about my thoughts for months now.
What's the connection? I never said you lied about your thoughts on WoT. What I said was that you spent considerable effort defending Roberts on this board, but label those who defend RJ as fan-boys, irrespective of the fact that some people had well reasoned arguments for why they found him an interesting read.
After all, why else would I comment inside the blog posts and have links where people here could read it if they so chose? And here's a question to consider: why do some feel as those their (or the dead author's) honor has been besmirched? After all, mocking or not, no one makes comments about imbeciles and burning dissidents at the stake unless there's a wee bit too much attachment to something.
Then perhaps a glance at some of Sidious's posts is in order? Because he's far from showing any undue attachment to RJ and his works. Though I suspect that, like me, he took exception to statements that WoT was bourgeois fiction that is read by people attracted to its "inherent" safety. That goes several steps beyond calling someone an imbecile, as far as I'm concerned.
It takes the "fan" part and restores the original, somewhat connotation of "fanatic" to me.

This has become such an easy way out of any discussion its becoming frustrating. It is one thing to call someone who goes to various sites and defends his pet author and insults his detractors a fanatic. It is quite something else to level the same accusation at any and everyone who thinks some popular genre author is great.
Perhaps I'm just too cynical to see the point in all this and should just bow out of such discussions in the future.
Maybe. Clearly, you have a standard set on what is good fiction and what is not. And after going through your comments in Roberts' blog, it seems clear you have no issues with characterizing some with different standards as people with poor taste (not in so many words, but the implication is rather clear).
Author Adam Roberts tackled the WoT.
- 19/03/2010 09:30:25 PM
13342 Views
Heh, While I agree with him about it being derivative, I still encourage people to read it.
- 20/03/2010 02:36:47 AM
2678 Views
My problem with the reviews:
- 20/03/2010 06:29:08 AM
3319 Views
Hear Hear !!!
.......................
=
........................ *NM*
- 20/03/2010 06:37:11 AM
1589 Views
.......................
=
........................ *NM*
- 20/03/2010 06:37:11 AM
1589 Views
well I agree and disagree
- 20/03/2010 06:51:29 AM
3011 Views
Re: well I agree and disagree
- 20/03/2010 02:12:43 PM
2561 Views
I'm amused by some of the responses
- 20/03/2010 07:20:03 PM
2977 Views
Are you suggesting that we are unqualified to disagree with him ?
- 20/03/2010 11:21:44 PM
2676 Views
No, I said rather that it's ridiculous to make such disparaging comments about his takes
- 20/03/2010 11:37:56 PM
2722 Views
I will reply to myself: What's the problem McFly , chicken ?
- 21/03/2010 12:29:36 AM
2518 Views
My sister called me chicken once
- 10/04/2010 01:18:31 AM
2587 Views
Re: I'm amused by some of the responses
- 23/03/2010 04:50:42 PM
2615 Views
And I'm even more amused by this response
- 24/03/2010 01:11:50 AM
2550 Views
- 24/03/2010 01:11:50 AM
2550 Views
On a completely unrelated note...
- 24/03/2010 06:15:25 AM
2472 Views
Ha!
- 24/03/2010 06:34:48 AM
2451 Views
- 24/03/2010 06:34:48 AM
2451 Views
My congratulations then
. *NM*
- 24/03/2010 06:36:11 AM
2383 Views
. *NM*
- 24/03/2010 06:36:11 AM
2383 Views
Wow, you guys have completely missed the point of the Wheel of Time series
- 22/03/2010 05:28:07 PM
2598 Views
- 22/03/2010 05:28:07 PM
2598 Views
There's a point to it?
- 22/03/2010 06:47:12 PM
2585 Views
- 22/03/2010 06:47:12 PM
2585 Views
Yes, RJ has explained it at least a few times and the main sequence of each book invokes his message *NM*
- 24/03/2010 02:09:01 AM
1531 Views
You're not taking me seriously now, are you?
- 24/03/2010 02:54:37 AM
2492 Views
- 24/03/2010 02:54:37 AM
2492 Views
I meant the reason why RJ wrote WoT in the first place
- 24/03/2010 06:39:47 AM
2490 Views
And which, arguably, could be viewed as being done in a hackneyed way
- 24/03/2010 07:15:55 AM
2548 Views
I thought the point was to write about a bunch of stuff happening?
- 09/04/2010 03:42:49 PM
2544 Views
pfft wth-ever
- 26/03/2010 12:35:53 AM
2362 Views
Dude's been up for more awards for his writing than RJ ever was
- 26/03/2010 12:28:19 PM
2627 Views
bla bla bla
- 29/03/2010 06:17:07 AM
2523 Views
Wow. That post was more entertaining than Mr. Roberts' review. Thank you
*NM*
- 29/03/2010 08:23:41 AM
1705 Views
*NM*
- 29/03/2010 08:23:41 AM
1705 Views
You must have low standards for entertainment
- 29/03/2010 08:54:03 AM
2467 Views
Re: You must have low standards for entertainment
- 29/03/2010 09:13:44 AM
2570 Views
I know you were, thus the
at the least of my comment
- 29/03/2010 09:19:30 AM
2388 Views
at the least of my comment
- 29/03/2010 09:19:30 AM
2388 Views
Unimpressed
- 29/03/2010 10:50:07 PM
2866 Views
Isn't that a bit uncharitable, Dom, considering how much you approved of what I did with CoT?
- 30/03/2010 12:03:48 AM
2859 Views
Re: Dude's been up for more awards for his writing than RJ ever was
- 29/03/2010 04:32:23 PM
2593 Views
Might want to re-read their Wikis again.
- 29/03/2010 07:07:11 PM
2416 Views
Awards
- 29/03/2010 07:42:03 PM
2374 Views
That link is out of date
- 29/03/2010 07:54:56 PM
2354 Views
Re: That link is out of date
- 29/03/2010 08:22:03 PM
2517 Views
This is a battle of win/lose?
- 29/03/2010 08:47:54 PM
2387 Views
Re: This is a battle of win/lose?
- 29/03/2010 09:03:07 PM
2438 Views
*considers employing the Chewbacca defense*
- 29/03/2010 09:28:06 PM
2437 Views
Re: *considers employing the Chewbacca defense*
- 29/03/2010 09:44:58 PM
2621 Views
The final point explains the "defense"
- 30/03/2010 12:24:56 AM
2347 Views
Re: The final point explains the "defense"
- 30/03/2010 01:33:04 PM
2285 Views
No, no, no
- 30/03/2010 06:38:41 PM
2359 Views
Re: No, no, no
- 30/03/2010 07:51:34 PM
2461 Views
Still continuing, huh?
- 31/03/2010 02:10:13 AM
2407 Views
Re: Still continuing, huh?
- 31/03/2010 03:56:57 PM
2386 Views
He's now reviewed the third book
- 26/03/2010 12:27:16 PM
2617 Views
Well, this time I must disagree with him
.
- 29/03/2010 07:31:40 AM
2320 Views
.
- 29/03/2010 07:31:40 AM
2320 Views
I don't think he was claiming that RJ was alone in doing that
- 29/03/2010 07:44:07 AM
2338 Views
Hah!
- 29/03/2010 06:07:28 PM
2347 Views
Well...
- 29/03/2010 06:52:10 PM
2263 Views
Differing perspectives, I guess.
- 29/03/2010 07:58:13 PM
2455 Views
I suppose
- 29/03/2010 08:50:43 PM
2360 Views
Re: I suppose
- 30/03/2010 12:18:30 AM
2498 Views
Hey, DomA, do you know why the Shienarans randomly speak in the Old Tongue?
- 30/03/2010 12:52:01 AM
2337 Views
Re: Hey, DomA, do you know why the Shienarans randomly speak in the Old Tongue?
- 30/03/2010 07:45:08 AM
2521 Views
But why only them?
- 30/03/2010 08:07:00 AM
2423 Views
The Shadow Rising review
- 02/04/2010 09:42:53 AM
2617 Views
I wonder if this borders on trolling
- 02/04/2010 02:29:58 PM
11158 Views
That would be a mistake
- 02/04/2010 09:16:25 PM
2639 Views
Re: That would be a mistake
- 02/04/2010 10:28:56 PM
2383 Views
I agree, Roberts is more and more coming across to me as just bitter
- 10/04/2010 01:24:52 AM
2497 Views
Little late to this one as well
- 10/04/2010 11:12:04 AM
2511 Views
Perhaps you should have led with this bit
- 10/04/2010 02:52:23 PM
2607 Views
I guess I just presumed that people would read the header to his blog
- 12/04/2010 03:54:10 AM
2423 Views
- 12/04/2010 03:54:10 AM
2423 Views
What review? I couldn't find one...
- 02/04/2010 08:00:45 PM
2568 Views
Re: What review? I couldn't find one...
- 02/04/2010 09:22:13 PM
2584 Views
See my comment below
- 02/04/2010 09:32:54 PM
2650 Views
Re: See my comment below
- 03/04/2010 09:31:22 AM
2985 Views
Sorry I'm late in responding, but I've been quite busy this week
- 07/04/2010 09:45:48 PM
2844 Views
Speaking of irritation
- 02/04/2010 10:50:04 PM
2539 Views
To be fair, even among the RaFOers there have been tons of posts that missed certain events
- 09/04/2010 03:47:30 PM
2447 Views
Commentary, then?
- 02/04/2010 09:27:18 PM
2420 Views
- 02/04/2010 09:27:18 PM
2420 Views
Here's the thing...
- 02/04/2010 10:11:18 PM
2368 Views
Re: Here's the thing...
- 02/04/2010 10:31:56 PM
2220 Views
Re: Commentary, then?
- 05/04/2010 03:44:07 PM
2333 Views
- 05/04/2010 03:44:07 PM
2333 Views
for a man that bitterly complains about an author who is padding his work
- 08/04/2010 09:41:07 PM
2555 Views
1400 words is long-winded?
- 09/04/2010 10:07:41 AM
2596 Views
- 09/04/2010 10:07:41 AM
2596 Views
since you can sum up those 1400 words in about 25 yes that's longwinded
- 09/04/2010 01:36:16 PM
2472 Views
Except I didn't really sum it up, as I left out quite a bit
- 10/04/2010 11:15:42 AM
2493 Views
You are very defensive over this
- 10/04/2010 01:54:15 PM
2295 Views
Nah, more of a devil's advocate than anything else
- 12/04/2010 03:57:12 AM
2356 Views
Well Larry I have started reading Gradsil by Adam Roberts
- 07/04/2010 08:59:28 PM
2525 Views
I demand a paragraph by paragraph review, with footnotes!
- 07/04/2010 09:50:39 PM
2417 Views
Re: I demand a paragraph by paragraph review, with footnotes!
- 08/04/2010 01:06:20 PM
2273 Views
Which Invisible Man?
- 09/04/2010 09:58:44 AM
2481 Views
He brings up some interesting points, if in an unnecessarily rude manner
- 08/04/2010 12:42:25 PM
2410 Views
To be honest, I doubt most readers of the series obsess over it that much
- 09/04/2010 10:05:49 AM
2425 Views
- 09/04/2010 10:05:49 AM
2425 Views
Re: To be honest, I doubt most readers of the series obsess over it that much
- 09/04/2010 01:28:17 PM
2954 Views
- 09/04/2010 01:28:17 PM
2954 Views
Re: To be honest, I doubt most readers of the series obsess over it that much
- 10/04/2010 11:40:22 AM
2428 Views
- 10/04/2010 11:40:22 AM
2428 Views
why are you so bothered by people being unimpressed with Roberts?
- 10/04/2010 02:19:08 PM
2421 Views
Not bothered as much as I am bemused by the ad hominems, to be honest
- 12/04/2010 04:11:12 AM
2739 Views
And in vol. 5, Roberts discovers the horrors of the circus
- 09/04/2010 09:57:03 AM
2410 Views
Basically he just states the "nothing happens"-argument...
- 09/04/2010 03:26:02 PM
2305 Views
Well, what was really resolved here?
- 10/04/2010 11:25:25 AM
2393 Views
Well...
- 12/04/2010 05:05:20 PM
2514 Views
So very little was resolved and much was set into motion, then?
- 12/04/2010 06:55:45 PM
2489 Views
Yes...
- 12/04/2010 10:51:08 PM
2202 Views
Ever read Umberto Eco's How To Travel with a Salmon?
- 12/04/2010 11:07:19 PM
2546 Views
I guess...
- 13/04/2010 10:03:03 AM
2538 Views
Sounds like you value prolixity for the sake of prolixity, to be honest
- 13/04/2010 04:41:07 PM
3653 Views
Nah...
- 13/04/2010 05:29:34 PM
2220 Views
He's read and enjoyed Proust, among others
- 13/04/2010 07:37:39 PM
2339 Views
Ah, well...
- 13/04/2010 09:45:45 PM
2256 Views
Dismissive, much?
- 13/04/2010 10:52:30 PM
2464 Views
- 13/04/2010 10:52:30 PM
2464 Views
About that bifurcation...
- 14/04/2010 02:02:15 AM
2422 Views
Sorry that I was busy yesterday and didn't have a chance to reply until now
- 15/04/2010 01:46:54 PM
2541 Views
I'm sorry, but he's totally right. "The Circus" made me put down this series for 5 YEARS.
- 09/04/2010 03:38:16 PM
2422 Views
Lord of Chaos commentary
- 16/04/2010 03:39:39 PM
2398 Views
No no. It was Lord of Heaven!
- 16/04/2010 05:51:11 PM
2273 Views
Yeah, I noticed that
- 16/04/2010 11:16:26 PM
2212 Views
- 16/04/2010 11:16:26 PM
2212 Views
I would love the see him review Goodkind...
- 16/04/2010 11:51:07 PM
2437 Views
I don't wish that on anyone who doesn't have copious amounts of alcohol
- 16/04/2010 11:57:41 PM
2331 Views
A Crown of Swords - or is it deco-porn?
- 23/04/2010 08:36:17 AM
2459 Views
Re: A Crown of Swords - or is it deco-porn?
- 29/04/2010 06:02:28 PM
2401 Views
I disagree
- 29/04/2010 09:34:49 PM
2230 Views
The Path of Daggers commentary
- 07/05/2010 10:39:03 AM
2546 Views
Winter's Heart
- 21/05/2010 12:46:14 PM
2530 Views
I think WH was my least favorite of the WoT novels I re-read
- 21/05/2010 04:49:31 PM
2390 Views
Re: I think WH was my least favorite of the WoT novels I re-read
- 25/05/2010 05:05:09 PM
2535 Views
WH was my least favorite novel in the series, and that is saying a lot.
- 28/05/2010 03:15:13 PM
2374 Views
I completely agree with his KoD post. Here is my favorite quote:
- 28/05/2010 03:08:31 PM
2703 Views
Roberts reflects back on WoT 1-11, with answers to questions asked of him
- 25/06/2010 12:51:29 PM
2515 Views
This guy should be burned at the stake
- 25/06/2010 03:22:34 PM
9995 Views
Are you done making a fool out of yourself, Mark?
- 26/06/2010 06:53:37 PM
2432 Views
Oh come on...
- 26/06/2010 09:06:01 PM
2500 Views
Well, the burning at the stake was a bit much...
- 26/06/2010 10:19:40 PM
2503 Views
Well, really! You brought the comment to his notice...
- 26/06/2010 11:34:08 PM
2497 Views
And your point is...?
- 27/06/2010 12:37:00 AM
2532 Views
Well...
- 27/06/2010 05:38:12 AM
2467 Views
Indeed... I think it's rather clear that Larry's goal has been to cause trouble
- 27/06/2010 10:57:36 AM
2648 Views
It's not about honour being beschmirched. It's about poor quality arguments. *NM*
- 30/03/2011 04:09:23 PM
1390 Views
One year later...
- 27/03/2011 03:40:29 AM
2334 Views
Re: One year later...
- 28/03/2011 05:03:32 PM
2573 Views
I see you subconsciously support critical takes.
- 28/03/2011 11:41:48 PM
2567 Views
No I conciously support telling you and him that you are pathetic, arrogent, & jelous. *NM*
- 30/03/2011 01:40:36 PM
1430 Views
Jealous?
- 30/03/2011 05:20:32 PM
2355 Views
You both are jelous of Jordan's tremendous succes.
- 30/03/2011 10:27:36 PM
2357 Views
Please learn how to spell the word "jealous" before tossing it about in the cavalier fashion you do
- 30/03/2011 10:54:36 PM
2380 Views
The fact that you teach is supposed to be a surprise?
- 31/03/2011 01:23:45 PM
2303 Views
After reading the standard-issue checklist of generic, tossabout pejoratives...
- 01/04/2011 03:06:18 PM
2456 Views
I agree, I didn't even notice it was an old post, definitely did not deserve to be revived. *NM*
- 30/03/2011 02:41:12 PM
1344 Views
Now I notice as well that this is a year old. You're very silly, Larry, very silly. *NM*
- 30/03/2011 04:13:38 PM
1467 Views
Yep!
- 30/03/2011 05:16:38 PM
2282 Views
- 30/03/2011 05:16:38 PM
2282 Views
He's not an "author", he's just a stupid troll, do not feed him *NM*
- 30/03/2011 02:39:19 PM
1356 Views

