Active Users:869 Time:08/05/2026 03:32:07 AM
In any case you can see why RJ wanted one book ajfurst Send a noteboard - 01/12/2010 01:41:56 AM
It's a pity they didn't split it into two books instead of three. Three books split by clusters or chronologically was going to be flawed in one of the ways discussed. Two books could have been split with it ending after Perrin destroyed the Dreamspike and the Shadowspawn.

So by that point in time you'd have had Rand, Egwene, Perrin's arc's completed, Avi's visions taking place when all those arcs are held up/in despair. Leaving only Perrin's talks with Elayne, Elayne's 'exciting' antics in Cairhien and Mat's ToG visit pushed to AMOL of the main arcs. Along with some of Lan and the Epilogue. And of those only the Moraine one missing would have disappointed fans. Sure TGS would have had 500 odd of the 750 odd pages of TOM and required more pages and/or a smaller font, but it would have resolved the problems of chronology - which for me is not the out of order, it's the lack of despair in TOM it caused - whilst still giving fans plenty of resolution.

Of course we would have had an extra 9-12 months to wait for the book in that case, so it wouldn't have been perfect. It would have been the best option though IMO. TGS would have had the Light set back then ready, then AMOL the Last Battle. A neat division, rather then an arbitrary one (TGS could just have easily been Rand and Perrin or Rand and Mat, with TOM Egwene and Perrin or Egwene and Mat).
This message last edited by ajfurst on 01/12/2010 at 01:46:19 AM
Reply to message
/tGS: These are damned good books. - 27/11/2010 02:22:05 AM 1712 Views
OK. *NM* - 27/11/2010 02:35:06 AM 419 Views
meh. ToM sucked for me. after tGS, I had become a bit hopeful, but now I see ... - 27/11/2010 03:39:49 AM 1065 Views
You keep trying to make that nickname stick... - 27/11/2010 08:47:52 PM 1061 Views
yeah!!..... - 27/11/2010 08:55:37 PM 948 Views
meh. - 27/11/2010 09:31:30 PM 924 Views
Yeah, they are - 27/11/2010 06:03:59 AM 984 Views
Disagree strongly on the time line issue - TOM showed what a mistake splitting by 'clusters' was IMO - 27/11/2010 07:24:55 AM 1047 Views
Re: Disagree strongly on the time line issue - TOM showed what a mistake splitting by 'clusters' was - 27/11/2010 05:59:47 PM 930 Views
I agree with this as well. - 27/11/2010 06:31:37 PM 1041 Views
Splitting it this way was the only realistic choice - 29/11/2010 01:58:52 PM 884 Views
Disagree - plus COT lacked almost anything full stop - 30/11/2010 12:03:24 AM 1072 Views
Re: Disagree - plus COT lacked almost anything full stop - 30/11/2010 12:18:57 AM 916 Views
It will be better than CoT, sure, but still not good enough to appease most fans - 30/11/2010 06:20:38 PM 1057 Views
In any case you can see why RJ wanted one book - 01/12/2010 01:41:56 AM 921 Views
BS style - 27/11/2010 07:25:38 AM 1143 Views
That's the thing! If it was in its normal, Jordan paced writing, ... - 27/11/2010 08:52:05 AM 984 Views
Re: That's the thing! If it was in its normal, Jordan paced writing, ... - 27/11/2010 11:57:22 PM 956 Views
And you know how RJ would've outlined the books from where? - 28/11/2010 05:07:31 AM 991 Views
BURN! *NM* - 29/11/2010 01:20:21 AM 432 Views
Re: And you know how RJ would've outlined the books from where? - 29/11/2010 08:16:12 AM 873 Views
so...you're guessing. - 30/11/2010 08:08:14 PM 961 Views
Re: so...you're guessing. - 01/12/2010 08:08:41 PM 842 Views
My only problems are Mats sudden drop in literacy and the timeline. *NM* - 27/11/2010 11:51:25 AM 442 Views
Not so much - 27/11/2010 09:52:23 PM 1111 Views
I agree with this - 27/11/2010 10:37:08 PM 910 Views
Have some question - 28/11/2010 05:38:42 AM 959 Views
Re: Have some question - 28/11/2010 05:54:10 PM 929 Views
Re: Have some question - 28/11/2010 06:19:30 PM 894 Views
Re: Have some question - 28/11/2010 06:50:40 PM 877 Views
Re: Have some question - 28/11/2010 07:01:38 PM 1023 Views
Re: Have some question - 29/11/2010 09:13:17 AM 901 Views
You stole my putters name, btw. - 29/11/2010 01:14:47 PM 995 Views
I had no problem following the jumps. - 29/11/2010 05:05:01 PM 882 Views
Yeah, anyone who found this bad clearly hasn't read Catch 22 - 30/11/2010 04:38:12 AM 867 Views
I didn't have any problems either. *NM* - 30/11/2010 04:40:24 AM 451 Views

Reply to Message