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
- 1128 Views
I don't see any reason the Graendal theory is wrong from that.
14/11/2009 02:53:25 PM
- 571 Views
He has stated that they will put the mystery to rest in the final books...
14/11/2009 04:02:53 PM
- 673 Views
I actually figured a way that this could come up quite naturally without Graendal
14/11/2009 04:11:24 PM
- 685 Views
RJ said it will probably revealed in the killer's PoV
14/11/2009 04:46:20 PM
- 519 Views
And Brandon said Harriet gave him the freedom to tell the story as he wishes.
14/11/2009 06:05:40 PM
- 500 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
- 502 Views
Wait...wait...this is funny.
20/11/2009 02:05:26 AM
- 417 Views
I often explained it, because many don't seem to get it
20/11/2009 12:17:21 PM
- 371 Views
So maybe Graendal didn't care enough about Asmodean, either.
20/11/2009 02:07:02 PM
- 395 Views
Neither Graendal nor Slayer mention killing Asmo...
20/11/2009 02:46:40 PM
- 547 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
- 480 Views
That's wrong
14/11/2009 04:45:02 PM
- 595 Views
Not one word of what I wrote is wrong.
15/11/2009 01:41:18 AM
- 486 Views
right here
15/11/2009 03:04:57 AM
- 456 Views
If Graendal's name is mentioned, then "Graendal" is in the book. *NM*
15/11/2009 12:13:57 PM
- 212 Views
BS just said that Graendal will be mentioned, not appear as a character in ToM. *NM*
15/11/2009 09:58:53 AM
- 203 Views
BS never would have figured it out himself that Graendal did it? *NM*
14/11/2009 05:20:19 PM
- 199 Views
Re: I don't see any reason the Graendal theory is wrong from that.
19/11/2009 12:07:25 AM
- 689 Views
I don't agree with this interpretation at all - your grasping for straws...
14/11/2009 07:34:58 PM
- 476 Views
Only if you make the assumption that she was the most obvious to Sanderson.
14/11/2009 07:37:39 PM
- 532 Views
No. Try again.
14/11/2009 11:35:59 PM
- 551 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
- 193 Views
Actually this is more against the Slayer theory
15/11/2009 01:49:08 PM
- 464 Views
Nonsense...
15/11/2009 02:06:04 PM
- 447 Views
Your tenacity is impressive.
15/11/2009 03:14:50 PM
- 494 Views
Absolut statements in such discussions...
15/11/2009 03:53:22 PM
- 425 Views
Re: Absolut statements in such discussions...
15/11/2009 05:57:25 PM
- 383 Views