It is the easiest thing in the world to denigrate something purely through the use of snide remarks and anecdotes condescendingly offered.
This review is the equivalent of a sarcastic teenager making fun of a movie he wants to hate. Everybody caught the obvious parallels to LoTR in RJ's work the first time we read it. We all noticed his often long winded descriptions. But this guy picks out a few of the most obvious criticisms of RJ's work and digs no deeper.
His description of the Ways as simply a cheap short cut to mordor is absolutely ridiculous. The concept of the ways was absolutely critical to the entire novel. If you read the book and gave it even a little thought, the usage of the ways from Caemlyn did not seem contrived at all (or like some kind of lame cop-out). The only thing that seems like a cop-out is the appearance of Loial to take them through the ways.
There is so much more to WoT than this reviewer cares to discuss. There is an incredible depth, consistency, and wonderful imagination in these works. The prologue to the Eye of the World is still one of the most fantastic passages of fantasy I have ever read. After reading it I knew I was about to dive into an incredible story.
I suppose in short I am trying to say that this guy's review did not do justice to EOTW. Anybody here could effectively lampoon any work simply by imitating the tone of Adam Roberts. It is sad that Adam Roberts offered a few bits of drive by sarcasm as a review of the first two books of one of the most successful fantasy series of all time. The simple fact that EOTW began a series of twelve 600-900 page books with book twelve hitting #1 on the NYT best seller list indicates that a deeper look into the merits of the book is warranted. It is not just a tolkein rip-off. If that is all you came away with then it is your own fault.
This review is the equivalent of a sarcastic teenager making fun of a movie he wants to hate. Everybody caught the obvious parallels to LoTR in RJ's work the first time we read it. We all noticed his often long winded descriptions. But this guy picks out a few of the most obvious criticisms of RJ's work and digs no deeper.
His description of the Ways as simply a cheap short cut to mordor is absolutely ridiculous. The concept of the ways was absolutely critical to the entire novel. If you read the book and gave it even a little thought, the usage of the ways from Caemlyn did not seem contrived at all (or like some kind of lame cop-out). The only thing that seems like a cop-out is the appearance of Loial to take them through the ways.
There is so much more to WoT than this reviewer cares to discuss. There is an incredible depth, consistency, and wonderful imagination in these works. The prologue to the Eye of the World is still one of the most fantastic passages of fantasy I have ever read. After reading it I knew I was about to dive into an incredible story.
I suppose in short I am trying to say that this guy's review did not do justice to EOTW. Anybody here could effectively lampoon any work simply by imitating the tone of Adam Roberts. It is sad that Adam Roberts offered a few bits of drive by sarcasm as a review of the first two books of one of the most successful fantasy series of all time. The simple fact that EOTW began a series of twelve 600-900 page books with book twelve hitting #1 on the NYT best seller list indicates that a deeper look into the merits of the book is warranted. It is not just a tolkein rip-off. If that is all you came away with then it is your own fault.
A little learning is a dangerous thing.
Author Adam Roberts tackled the WoT.
- 19/03/2010 09:30:25 PM
13356 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
2688 Views
My problem with the reviews:
- 20/03/2010 06:29:08 AM
3334 Views
Hear Hear !!!
.......................
=
........................ *NM*
- 20/03/2010 06:37:11 AM
1596 Views
.......................
=
........................ *NM*
- 20/03/2010 06:37:11 AM
1596 Views
well I agree and disagree
- 20/03/2010 06:51:29 AM
3018 Views
Re: well I agree and disagree
- 20/03/2010 02:12:43 PM
2572 Views
I'm amused by some of the responses
- 20/03/2010 07:20:03 PM
2994 Views
Are you suggesting that we are unqualified to disagree with him ?
- 20/03/2010 11:21:44 PM
2689 Views
No, I said rather that it's ridiculous to make such disparaging comments about his takes
- 20/03/2010 11:37:56 PM
2735 Views
I will reply to myself: What's the problem McFly , chicken ?
- 21/03/2010 12:29:36 AM
2530 Views
My sister called me chicken once
- 10/04/2010 01:18:31 AM
2599 Views
Re: I'm amused by some of the responses
- 23/03/2010 04:50:42 PM
2622 Views
And I'm even more amused by this response
- 24/03/2010 01:11:50 AM
2557 Views
- 24/03/2010 01:11:50 AM
2557 Views
On a completely unrelated note...
- 24/03/2010 06:15:25 AM
2484 Views
Ha!
- 24/03/2010 06:34:48 AM
2467 Views
- 24/03/2010 06:34:48 AM
2467 Views
My congratulations then
. *NM*
- 24/03/2010 06:36:11 AM
2394 Views
. *NM*
- 24/03/2010 06:36:11 AM
2394 Views
Wow, you guys have completely missed the point of the Wheel of Time series
- 22/03/2010 05:28:07 PM
2608 Views
- 22/03/2010 05:28:07 PM
2608 Views
There's a point to it?
- 22/03/2010 06:47:12 PM
2593 Views
- 22/03/2010 06:47:12 PM
2593 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
1536 Views
You're not taking me seriously now, are you?
- 24/03/2010 02:54:37 AM
2506 Views
- 24/03/2010 02:54:37 AM
2506 Views
I meant the reason why RJ wrote WoT in the first place
- 24/03/2010 06:39:47 AM
2501 Views
And which, arguably, could be viewed as being done in a hackneyed way
- 24/03/2010 07:15:55 AM
2559 Views
I thought the point was to write about a bunch of stuff happening?
- 09/04/2010 03:42:49 PM
2554 Views
pfft wth-ever
- 26/03/2010 12:35:53 AM
2371 Views
Dude's been up for more awards for his writing than RJ ever was
- 26/03/2010 12:28:19 PM
2634 Views
bla bla bla
- 29/03/2010 06:17:07 AM
2530 Views
Wow. That post was more entertaining than Mr. Roberts' review. Thank you
*NM*
- 29/03/2010 08:23:41 AM
1710 Views
*NM*
- 29/03/2010 08:23:41 AM
1710 Views
You must have low standards for entertainment
- 29/03/2010 08:54:03 AM
2477 Views
Re: You must have low standards for entertainment
- 29/03/2010 09:13:44 AM
2580 Views
I know you were, thus the
at the least of my comment
- 29/03/2010 09:19:30 AM
2397 Views
at the least of my comment
- 29/03/2010 09:19:30 AM
2397 Views
Unimpressed
- 29/03/2010 10:50:07 PM
2876 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
2870 Views
Re: Dude's been up for more awards for his writing than RJ ever was
- 29/03/2010 04:32:23 PM
2608 Views
Might want to re-read their Wikis again.
- 29/03/2010 07:07:11 PM
2425 Views
Awards
- 29/03/2010 07:42:03 PM
2381 Views
That link is out of date
- 29/03/2010 07:54:56 PM
2367 Views
Re: That link is out of date
- 29/03/2010 08:22:03 PM
2529 Views
This is a battle of win/lose?
- 29/03/2010 08:47:54 PM
2396 Views
Re: This is a battle of win/lose?
- 29/03/2010 09:03:07 PM
2450 Views
*considers employing the Chewbacca defense*
- 29/03/2010 09:28:06 PM
2447 Views
Re: *considers employing the Chewbacca defense*
- 29/03/2010 09:44:58 PM
2627 Views
The final point explains the "defense"
- 30/03/2010 12:24:56 AM
2362 Views
Re: The final point explains the "defense"
- 30/03/2010 01:33:04 PM
2301 Views
No, no, no
- 30/03/2010 06:38:41 PM
2368 Views
Re: No, no, no
- 30/03/2010 07:51:34 PM
2468 Views
Still continuing, huh?
- 31/03/2010 02:10:13 AM
2416 Views
Re: Still continuing, huh?
- 31/03/2010 03:56:57 PM
2392 Views
He's now reviewed the third book
- 26/03/2010 12:27:16 PM
2631 Views
Well, this time I must disagree with him
.
- 29/03/2010 07:31:40 AM
2328 Views
.
- 29/03/2010 07:31:40 AM
2328 Views
I don't think he was claiming that RJ was alone in doing that
- 29/03/2010 07:44:07 AM
2349 Views
Hah!
- 29/03/2010 06:07:28 PM
2356 Views
Well...
- 29/03/2010 06:52:10 PM
2273 Views
Differing perspectives, I guess.
- 29/03/2010 07:58:13 PM
2467 Views
I suppose
- 29/03/2010 08:50:43 PM
2375 Views
Re: I suppose
- 30/03/2010 12:18:30 AM
2503 Views
Hey, DomA, do you know why the Shienarans randomly speak in the Old Tongue?
- 30/03/2010 12:52:01 AM
2350 Views
Re: Hey, DomA, do you know why the Shienarans randomly speak in the Old Tongue?
- 30/03/2010 07:45:08 AM
2530 Views
But why only them?
- 30/03/2010 08:07:00 AM
2429 Views
The Shadow Rising review
- 02/04/2010 09:42:53 AM
2632 Views
I wonder if this borders on trolling
- 02/04/2010 02:29:58 PM
11164 Views
That would be a mistake
- 02/04/2010 09:16:25 PM
2645 Views
Re: That would be a mistake
- 02/04/2010 10:28:56 PM
2393 Views
I agree, Roberts is more and more coming across to me as just bitter
- 10/04/2010 01:24:52 AM
2506 Views
Little late to this one as well
- 10/04/2010 11:12:04 AM
2522 Views
Perhaps you should have led with this bit
- 10/04/2010 02:52:23 PM
2616 Views
I guess I just presumed that people would read the header to his blog
- 12/04/2010 03:54:10 AM
2430 Views
- 12/04/2010 03:54:10 AM
2430 Views
What review? I couldn't find one...
- 02/04/2010 08:00:45 PM
2587 Views
Re: What review? I couldn't find one...
- 02/04/2010 09:22:13 PM
2590 Views
See my comment below
- 02/04/2010 09:32:54 PM
2661 Views
Re: See my comment below
- 03/04/2010 09:31:22 AM
2997 Views
Sorry I'm late in responding, but I've been quite busy this week
- 07/04/2010 09:45:48 PM
2851 Views
Speaking of irritation
- 02/04/2010 10:50:04 PM
2554 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
2459 Views
Commentary, then?
- 02/04/2010 09:27:18 PM
2430 Views
- 02/04/2010 09:27:18 PM
2430 Views
Here's the thing...
- 02/04/2010 10:11:18 PM
2376 Views
Re: Here's the thing...
- 02/04/2010 10:31:56 PM
2227 Views
Re: Commentary, then?
- 05/04/2010 03:44:07 PM
2342 Views
- 05/04/2010 03:44:07 PM
2342 Views
for a man that bitterly complains about an author who is padding his work
- 08/04/2010 09:41:07 PM
2567 Views
1400 words is long-winded?
- 09/04/2010 10:07:41 AM
2606 Views
- 09/04/2010 10:07:41 AM
2606 Views
since you can sum up those 1400 words in about 25 yes that's longwinded
- 09/04/2010 01:36:16 PM
2484 Views
Except I didn't really sum it up, as I left out quite a bit
- 10/04/2010 11:15:42 AM
2499 Views
You are very defensive over this
- 10/04/2010 01:54:15 PM
2300 Views
Nah, more of a devil's advocate than anything else
- 12/04/2010 03:57:12 AM
2365 Views
Well Larry I have started reading Gradsil by Adam Roberts
- 07/04/2010 08:59:28 PM
2533 Views
I demand a paragraph by paragraph review, with footnotes!
- 07/04/2010 09:50:39 PM
2426 Views
Re: I demand a paragraph by paragraph review, with footnotes!
- 08/04/2010 01:06:20 PM
2282 Views
Which Invisible Man?
- 09/04/2010 09:58:44 AM
2493 Views
He brings up some interesting points, if in an unnecessarily rude manner
- 08/04/2010 12:42:25 PM
2418 Views
To be honest, I doubt most readers of the series obsess over it that much
- 09/04/2010 10:05:49 AM
2438 Views
- 09/04/2010 10:05:49 AM
2438 Views
Re: To be honest, I doubt most readers of the series obsess over it that much
- 09/04/2010 01:28:17 PM
2965 Views
- 09/04/2010 01:28:17 PM
2965 Views
Re: To be honest, I doubt most readers of the series obsess over it that much
- 10/04/2010 11:40:22 AM
2441 Views
- 10/04/2010 11:40:22 AM
2441 Views
why are you so bothered by people being unimpressed with Roberts?
- 10/04/2010 02:19:08 PM
2440 Views
Not bothered as much as I am bemused by the ad hominems, to be honest
- 12/04/2010 04:11:12 AM
2746 Views
And in vol. 5, Roberts discovers the horrors of the circus
- 09/04/2010 09:57:03 AM
2420 Views
Basically he just states the "nothing happens"-argument...
- 09/04/2010 03:26:02 PM
2317 Views
Well, what was really resolved here?
- 10/04/2010 11:25:25 AM
2401 Views
Well...
- 12/04/2010 05:05:20 PM
2525 Views
So very little was resolved and much was set into motion, then?
- 12/04/2010 06:55:45 PM
2494 Views
Yes...
- 12/04/2010 10:51:08 PM
2210 Views
Ever read Umberto Eco's How To Travel with a Salmon?
- 12/04/2010 11:07:19 PM
2563 Views
I guess...
- 13/04/2010 10:03:03 AM
2549 Views
Sounds like you value prolixity for the sake of prolixity, to be honest
- 13/04/2010 04:41:07 PM
3665 Views
Nah...
- 13/04/2010 05:29:34 PM
2231 Views
He's read and enjoyed Proust, among others
- 13/04/2010 07:37:39 PM
2351 Views
Ah, well...
- 13/04/2010 09:45:45 PM
2263 Views
Dismissive, much?
- 13/04/2010 10:52:30 PM
2473 Views
- 13/04/2010 10:52:30 PM
2473 Views
About that bifurcation...
- 14/04/2010 02:02:15 AM
2432 Views
Sorry that I was busy yesterday and didn't have a chance to reply until now
- 15/04/2010 01:46:54 PM
2553 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
2432 Views
Lord of Chaos commentary
- 16/04/2010 03:39:39 PM
2408 Views
No no. It was Lord of Heaven!
- 16/04/2010 05:51:11 PM
2283 Views
Yeah, I noticed that
- 16/04/2010 11:16:26 PM
2219 Views
- 16/04/2010 11:16:26 PM
2219 Views
I would love the see him review Goodkind...
- 16/04/2010 11:51:07 PM
2443 Views
I don't wish that on anyone who doesn't have copious amounts of alcohol
- 16/04/2010 11:57:41 PM
2349 Views
A Crown of Swords - or is it deco-porn?
- 23/04/2010 08:36:17 AM
2465 Views
Re: A Crown of Swords - or is it deco-porn?
- 29/04/2010 06:02:28 PM
2412 Views
I disagree
- 29/04/2010 09:34:49 PM
2238 Views
The Path of Daggers commentary
- 07/05/2010 10:39:03 AM
2558 Views
Winter's Heart
- 21/05/2010 12:46:14 PM
2540 Views
I think WH was my least favorite of the WoT novels I re-read
- 21/05/2010 04:49:31 PM
2403 Views
Re: I think WH was my least favorite of the WoT novels I re-read
- 25/05/2010 05:05:09 PM
2546 Views
WH was my least favorite novel in the series, and that is saying a lot.
- 28/05/2010 03:15:13 PM
2379 Views
I completely agree with his KoD post. Here is my favorite quote:
- 28/05/2010 03:08:31 PM
2715 Views
Roberts reflects back on WoT 1-11, with answers to questions asked of him
- 25/06/2010 12:51:29 PM
2525 Views
This guy should be burned at the stake
- 25/06/2010 03:22:34 PM
10009 Views
Are you done making a fool out of yourself, Mark?
- 26/06/2010 06:53:37 PM
2443 Views
Oh come on...
- 26/06/2010 09:06:01 PM
2508 Views
Well, the burning at the stake was a bit much...
- 26/06/2010 10:19:40 PM
2508 Views
Well, really! You brought the comment to his notice...
- 26/06/2010 11:34:08 PM
2507 Views
And your point is...?
- 27/06/2010 12:37:00 AM
2542 Views
Well...
- 27/06/2010 05:38:12 AM
2477 Views
Indeed... I think it's rather clear that Larry's goal has been to cause trouble
- 27/06/2010 10:57:36 AM
2659 Views
It's not about honour being beschmirched. It's about poor quality arguments. *NM*
- 30/03/2011 04:09:23 PM
1397 Views
One year later...
- 27/03/2011 03:40:29 AM
2344 Views
Re: One year later...
- 28/03/2011 05:03:32 PM
2584 Views
I see you subconsciously support critical takes.
- 28/03/2011 11:41:48 PM
2577 Views
No I conciously support telling you and him that you are pathetic, arrogent, & jelous. *NM*
- 30/03/2011 01:40:36 PM
1434 Views
Jealous?
- 30/03/2011 05:20:32 PM
2371 Views
You both are jelous of Jordan's tremendous succes.
- 30/03/2011 10:27:36 PM
2365 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
2390 Views
The fact that you teach is supposed to be a surprise?
- 31/03/2011 01:23:45 PM
2310 Views
After reading the standard-issue checklist of generic, tossabout pejoratives...
- 01/04/2011 03:06:18 PM
2466 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
1349 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
1471 Views
Yep!
- 30/03/2011 05:16:38 PM
2292 Views
- 30/03/2011 05:16:38 PM
2292 Views
He's not an "author", he's just a stupid troll, do not feed him *NM*
- 30/03/2011 02:39:19 PM
1361 Views

