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
13204 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
2620 Views
My problem with the reviews:
- 20/03/2010 06:29:08 AM
3263 Views
Hear Hear !!!
.......................
=
........................ *NM*
- 20/03/2010 06:37:11 AM
1559 Views
.......................
=
........................ *NM*
- 20/03/2010 06:37:11 AM
1559 Views
well I agree and disagree
- 20/03/2010 06:51:29 AM
2964 Views
Re: well I agree and disagree
- 20/03/2010 02:12:43 PM
2506 Views
I'm amused by some of the responses
- 20/03/2010 07:20:03 PM
2915 Views
Are you suggesting that we are unqualified to disagree with him ?
- 20/03/2010 11:21:44 PM
2632 Views
No, I said rather that it's ridiculous to make such disparaging comments about his takes
- 20/03/2010 11:37:56 PM
2657 Views
I will reply to myself: What's the problem McFly , chicken ?
- 21/03/2010 12:29:36 AM
2458 Views
My sister called me chicken once
- 10/04/2010 01:18:31 AM
2515 Views
Re: I'm amused by some of the responses
- 23/03/2010 04:50:42 PM
2563 Views
And I'm even more amused by this response
- 24/03/2010 01:11:50 AM
2481 Views
- 24/03/2010 01:11:50 AM
2481 Views
On a completely unrelated note...
- 24/03/2010 06:15:25 AM
2381 Views
Ha!
- 24/03/2010 06:34:48 AM
2385 Views
- 24/03/2010 06:34:48 AM
2385 Views
My congratulations then
. *NM*
- 24/03/2010 06:36:11 AM
2316 Views
. *NM*
- 24/03/2010 06:36:11 AM
2316 Views
Wow, you guys have completely missed the point of the Wheel of Time series
- 22/03/2010 05:28:07 PM
2533 Views
- 22/03/2010 05:28:07 PM
2533 Views
There's a point to it?
- 22/03/2010 06:47:12 PM
2516 Views
- 22/03/2010 06:47:12 PM
2516 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
1497 Views
You're not taking me seriously now, are you?
- 24/03/2010 02:54:37 AM
2434 Views
- 24/03/2010 02:54:37 AM
2434 Views
I meant the reason why RJ wrote WoT in the first place
- 24/03/2010 06:39:47 AM
2435 Views
And which, arguably, could be viewed as being done in a hackneyed way
- 24/03/2010 07:15:55 AM
2485 Views
I thought the point was to write about a bunch of stuff happening?
- 09/04/2010 03:42:49 PM
2499 Views
pfft wth-ever
- 26/03/2010 12:35:53 AM
2306 Views
Dude's been up for more awards for his writing than RJ ever was
- 26/03/2010 12:28:19 PM
2565 Views
bla bla bla
- 29/03/2010 06:17:07 AM
2466 Views
Wow. That post was more entertaining than Mr. Roberts' review. Thank you
*NM*
- 29/03/2010 08:23:41 AM
1677 Views
*NM*
- 29/03/2010 08:23:41 AM
1677 Views
You must have low standards for entertainment
- 29/03/2010 08:54:03 AM
2408 Views
Re: You must have low standards for entertainment
- 29/03/2010 09:13:44 AM
2512 Views
I know you were, thus the
at the least of my comment
- 29/03/2010 09:19:30 AM
2333 Views
at the least of my comment
- 29/03/2010 09:19:30 AM
2333 Views
Unimpressed
- 29/03/2010 10:50:07 PM
2811 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
2809 Views
Re: Dude's been up for more awards for his writing than RJ ever was
- 29/03/2010 04:32:23 PM
2525 Views
Might want to re-read their Wikis again.
- 29/03/2010 07:07:11 PM
2354 Views
Awards
- 29/03/2010 07:42:03 PM
2313 Views
That link is out of date
- 29/03/2010 07:54:56 PM
2304 Views
Re: That link is out of date
- 29/03/2010 08:22:03 PM
2451 Views
This is a battle of win/lose?
- 29/03/2010 08:47:54 PM
2342 Views
Re: This is a battle of win/lose?
- 29/03/2010 09:03:07 PM
2381 Views
*considers employing the Chewbacca defense*
- 29/03/2010 09:28:06 PM
2369 Views
Re: *considers employing the Chewbacca defense*
- 29/03/2010 09:44:58 PM
2578 Views
The final point explains the "defense"
- 30/03/2010 12:24:56 AM
2276 Views
Re: The final point explains the "defense"
- 30/03/2010 01:33:04 PM
2235 Views
No, no, no
- 30/03/2010 06:38:41 PM
2303 Views
Re: No, no, no
- 30/03/2010 07:51:34 PM
2408 Views
Still continuing, huh?
- 31/03/2010 02:10:13 AM
2361 Views
Re: Still continuing, huh?
- 31/03/2010 03:56:57 PM
2327 Views
He's now reviewed the third book
- 26/03/2010 12:27:16 PM
2561 Views
Well, this time I must disagree with him
.
- 29/03/2010 07:31:40 AM
2274 Views
.
- 29/03/2010 07:31:40 AM
2274 Views
I don't think he was claiming that RJ was alone in doing that
- 29/03/2010 07:44:07 AM
2279 Views
Hah!
- 29/03/2010 06:07:28 PM
2294 Views
Well...
- 29/03/2010 06:52:10 PM
2207 Views
Differing perspectives, I guess.
- 29/03/2010 07:58:13 PM
2402 Views
I suppose
- 29/03/2010 08:50:43 PM
2307 Views
Re: I suppose
- 30/03/2010 12:18:30 AM
2449 Views
Hey, DomA, do you know why the Shienarans randomly speak in the Old Tongue?
- 30/03/2010 12:52:01 AM
2280 Views
Re: Hey, DomA, do you know why the Shienarans randomly speak in the Old Tongue?
- 30/03/2010 07:45:08 AM
2467 Views
But why only them?
- 30/03/2010 08:07:00 AM
2365 Views
The Shadow Rising review
- 02/04/2010 09:42:53 AM
2551 Views
I wonder if this borders on trolling
- 02/04/2010 02:29:58 PM
11096 Views
That would be a mistake
- 02/04/2010 09:16:25 PM
2564 Views
Re: That would be a mistake
- 02/04/2010 10:28:56 PM
2325 Views
I agree, Roberts is more and more coming across to me as just bitter
- 10/04/2010 01:24:52 AM
2431 Views
Little late to this one as well
- 10/04/2010 11:12:04 AM
2458 Views
Perhaps you should have led with this bit
- 10/04/2010 02:52:23 PM
2547 Views
I guess I just presumed that people would read the header to his blog
- 12/04/2010 03:54:10 AM
2365 Views
- 12/04/2010 03:54:10 AM
2365 Views
What review? I couldn't find one...
- 02/04/2010 08:00:45 PM
2518 Views
Re: What review? I couldn't find one...
- 02/04/2010 09:22:13 PM
2522 Views
See my comment below
- 02/04/2010 09:32:54 PM
2592 Views
Re: See my comment below
- 03/04/2010 09:31:22 AM
2919 Views
Sorry I'm late in responding, but I've been quite busy this week
- 07/04/2010 09:45:48 PM
2783 Views
Speaking of irritation
- 02/04/2010 10:50:04 PM
2485 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
2362 Views
Commentary, then?
- 02/04/2010 09:27:18 PM
2362 Views
- 02/04/2010 09:27:18 PM
2362 Views
Here's the thing...
- 02/04/2010 10:11:18 PM
2316 Views
Re: Here's the thing...
- 02/04/2010 10:31:56 PM
2153 Views
Re: Commentary, then?
- 05/04/2010 03:44:07 PM
2273 Views
- 05/04/2010 03:44:07 PM
2273 Views
for a man that bitterly complains about an author who is padding his work
- 08/04/2010 09:41:07 PM
2493 Views
1400 words is long-winded?
- 09/04/2010 10:07:41 AM
2537 Views
- 09/04/2010 10:07:41 AM
2537 Views
since you can sum up those 1400 words in about 25 yes that's longwinded
- 09/04/2010 01:36:16 PM
2410 Views
Except I didn't really sum it up, as I left out quite a bit
- 10/04/2010 11:15:42 AM
2437 Views
You are very defensive over this
- 10/04/2010 01:54:15 PM
2243 Views
Nah, more of a devil's advocate than anything else
- 12/04/2010 03:57:12 AM
2297 Views
Well Larry I have started reading Gradsil by Adam Roberts
- 07/04/2010 08:59:28 PM
2471 Views
I demand a paragraph by paragraph review, with footnotes!
- 07/04/2010 09:50:39 PM
2349 Views
Re: I demand a paragraph by paragraph review, with footnotes!
- 08/04/2010 01:06:20 PM
2211 Views
Which Invisible Man?
- 09/04/2010 09:58:44 AM
2435 Views
He brings up some interesting points, if in an unnecessarily rude manner
- 08/04/2010 12:42:25 PM
2363 Views
To be honest, I doubt most readers of the series obsess over it that much
- 09/04/2010 10:05:49 AM
2369 Views
- 09/04/2010 10:05:49 AM
2369 Views
Re: To be honest, I doubt most readers of the series obsess over it that much
- 09/04/2010 01:28:17 PM
2897 Views
- 09/04/2010 01:28:17 PM
2897 Views
Re: To be honest, I doubt most readers of the series obsess over it that much
- 10/04/2010 11:40:22 AM
2374 Views
- 10/04/2010 11:40:22 AM
2374 Views
why are you so bothered by people being unimpressed with Roberts?
- 10/04/2010 02:19:08 PM
2374 Views
Not bothered as much as I am bemused by the ad hominems, to be honest
- 12/04/2010 04:11:12 AM
2694 Views
And in vol. 5, Roberts discovers the horrors of the circus
- 09/04/2010 09:57:03 AM
2358 Views
Basically he just states the "nothing happens"-argument...
- 09/04/2010 03:26:02 PM
2251 Views
Well, what was really resolved here?
- 10/04/2010 11:25:25 AM
2338 Views
Well...
- 12/04/2010 05:05:20 PM
2463 Views
So very little was resolved and much was set into motion, then?
- 12/04/2010 06:55:45 PM
2418 Views
Yes...
- 12/04/2010 10:51:08 PM
2155 Views
Ever read Umberto Eco's How To Travel with a Salmon?
- 12/04/2010 11:07:19 PM
2484 Views
I guess...
- 13/04/2010 10:03:03 AM
2464 Views
Sounds like you value prolixity for the sake of prolixity, to be honest
- 13/04/2010 04:41:07 PM
3606 Views
Nah...
- 13/04/2010 05:29:34 PM
2166 Views
He's read and enjoyed Proust, among others
- 13/04/2010 07:37:39 PM
2273 Views
Ah, well...
- 13/04/2010 09:45:45 PM
2208 Views
Dismissive, much?
- 13/04/2010 10:52:30 PM
2396 Views
- 13/04/2010 10:52:30 PM
2396 Views
About that bifurcation...
- 14/04/2010 02:02:15 AM
2361 Views
Sorry that I was busy yesterday and didn't have a chance to reply until now
- 15/04/2010 01:46:54 PM
2482 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
2371 Views
Lord of Chaos commentary
- 16/04/2010 03:39:39 PM
2337 Views
No no. It was Lord of Heaven!
- 16/04/2010 05:51:11 PM
2232 Views
Yeah, I noticed that
- 16/04/2010 11:16:26 PM
2149 Views
- 16/04/2010 11:16:26 PM
2149 Views
I would love the see him review Goodkind...
- 16/04/2010 11:51:07 PM
2376 Views
I don't wish that on anyone who doesn't have copious amounts of alcohol
- 16/04/2010 11:57:41 PM
2273 Views
A Crown of Swords - or is it deco-porn?
- 23/04/2010 08:36:17 AM
2402 Views
Re: A Crown of Swords - or is it deco-porn?
- 29/04/2010 06:02:28 PM
2345 Views
I disagree
- 29/04/2010 09:34:49 PM
2172 Views
The Path of Daggers commentary
- 07/05/2010 10:39:03 AM
2492 Views
Winter's Heart
- 21/05/2010 12:46:14 PM
2470 Views
I think WH was my least favorite of the WoT novels I re-read
- 21/05/2010 04:49:31 PM
2325 Views
Re: I think WH was my least favorite of the WoT novels I re-read
- 25/05/2010 05:05:09 PM
2474 Views
WH was my least favorite novel in the series, and that is saying a lot.
- 28/05/2010 03:15:13 PM
2318 Views
I completely agree with his KoD post. Here is my favorite quote:
- 28/05/2010 03:08:31 PM
2642 Views
Roberts reflects back on WoT 1-11, with answers to questions asked of him
- 25/06/2010 12:51:29 PM
2441 Views
This guy should be burned at the stake
- 25/06/2010 03:22:34 PM
9917 Views
Are you done making a fool out of yourself, Mark?
- 26/06/2010 06:53:37 PM
2375 Views
Oh come on...
- 26/06/2010 09:06:01 PM
2448 Views
Well, the burning at the stake was a bit much...
- 26/06/2010 10:19:40 PM
2449 Views
Well, really! You brought the comment to his notice...
- 26/06/2010 11:34:08 PM
2448 Views
And your point is...?
- 27/06/2010 12:37:00 AM
2461 Views
Well...
- 27/06/2010 05:38:12 AM
2416 Views
Indeed... I think it's rather clear that Larry's goal has been to cause trouble
- 27/06/2010 10:57:36 AM
2591 Views
It's not about honour being beschmirched. It's about poor quality arguments. *NM*
- 30/03/2011 04:09:23 PM
1359 Views
One year later...
- 27/03/2011 03:40:29 AM
2278 Views
Re: One year later...
- 28/03/2011 05:03:32 PM
2512 Views
I see you subconsciously support critical takes.
- 28/03/2011 11:41:48 PM
2514 Views
No I conciously support telling you and him that you are pathetic, arrogent, & jelous. *NM*
- 30/03/2011 01:40:36 PM
1408 Views
Jealous?
- 30/03/2011 05:20:32 PM
2287 Views
You both are jelous of Jordan's tremendous succes.
- 30/03/2011 10:27:36 PM
2300 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
2329 Views
The fact that you teach is supposed to be a surprise?
- 31/03/2011 01:23:45 PM
2246 Views
After reading the standard-issue checklist of generic, tossabout pejoratives...
- 01/04/2011 03:06:18 PM
2407 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
1317 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
1441 Views
Yep!
- 30/03/2011 05:16:38 PM
2225 Views
- 30/03/2011 05:16:38 PM
2225 Views
He's not an "author", he's just a stupid troll, do not feed him *NM*
- 30/03/2011 02:39:19 PM
1332 Views

