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
13423 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
2728 Views
My problem with the reviews:
- 20/03/2010 06:29:08 AM
3370 Views
Hear Hear !!!
.......................
=
........................ *NM*
- 20/03/2010 06:37:11 AM
1613 Views
.......................
=
........................ *NM*
- 20/03/2010 06:37:11 AM
1613 Views
well I agree and disagree
- 20/03/2010 06:51:29 AM
3052 Views
Re: well I agree and disagree
- 20/03/2010 02:12:43 PM
2612 Views
I'm amused by some of the responses
- 20/03/2010 07:20:03 PM
3034 Views
Are you suggesting that we are unqualified to disagree with him ?
- 20/03/2010 11:21:44 PM
2727 Views
No, I said rather that it's ridiculous to make such disparaging comments about his takes
- 20/03/2010 11:37:56 PM
2773 Views
I will reply to myself: What's the problem McFly , chicken ?
- 21/03/2010 12:29:36 AM
2567 Views
My sister called me chicken once
- 10/04/2010 01:18:31 AM
2646 Views
Re: I'm amused by some of the responses
- 23/03/2010 04:50:42 PM
2664 Views
And I'm even more amused by this response
- 24/03/2010 01:11:50 AM
2598 Views
- 24/03/2010 01:11:50 AM
2598 Views
On a completely unrelated note...
- 24/03/2010 06:15:25 AM
2527 Views
Ha!
- 24/03/2010 06:34:48 AM
2506 Views
- 24/03/2010 06:34:48 AM
2506 Views
My congratulations then
. *NM*
- 24/03/2010 06:36:11 AM
2425 Views
. *NM*
- 24/03/2010 06:36:11 AM
2425 Views
Wow, you guys have completely missed the point of the Wheel of Time series
- 22/03/2010 05:28:07 PM
2639 Views
- 22/03/2010 05:28:07 PM
2639 Views
There's a point to it?
- 22/03/2010 06:47:12 PM
2624 Views
- 22/03/2010 06:47:12 PM
2624 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
1554 Views
You're not taking me seriously now, are you?
- 24/03/2010 02:54:37 AM
2542 Views
- 24/03/2010 02:54:37 AM
2542 Views
I meant the reason why RJ wrote WoT in the first place
- 24/03/2010 06:39:47 AM
2536 Views
And which, arguably, could be viewed as being done in a hackneyed way
- 24/03/2010 07:15:55 AM
2593 Views
I thought the point was to write about a bunch of stuff happening?
- 09/04/2010 03:42:49 PM
2596 Views
pfft wth-ever
- 26/03/2010 12:35:53 AM
2415 Views
Dude's been up for more awards for his writing than RJ ever was
- 26/03/2010 12:28:19 PM
2675 Views
bla bla bla
- 29/03/2010 06:17:07 AM
2569 Views
Wow. That post was more entertaining than Mr. Roberts' review. Thank you
*NM*
- 29/03/2010 08:23:41 AM
1730 Views
*NM*
- 29/03/2010 08:23:41 AM
1730 Views
You must have low standards for entertainment
- 29/03/2010 08:54:03 AM
2523 Views
Re: You must have low standards for entertainment
- 29/03/2010 09:13:44 AM
2614 Views
I know you were, thus the
at the least of my comment
- 29/03/2010 09:19:30 AM
2429 Views
at the least of my comment
- 29/03/2010 09:19:30 AM
2429 Views
Unimpressed
- 29/03/2010 10:50:07 PM
2909 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
2915 Views
Re: Dude's been up for more awards for his writing than RJ ever was
- 29/03/2010 04:32:23 PM
2647 Views
Might want to re-read their Wikis again.
- 29/03/2010 07:07:11 PM
2457 Views
Awards
- 29/03/2010 07:42:03 PM
2414 Views
That link is out of date
- 29/03/2010 07:54:56 PM
2407 Views
Re: That link is out of date
- 29/03/2010 08:22:03 PM
2572 Views
This is a battle of win/lose?
- 29/03/2010 08:47:54 PM
2437 Views
Re: This is a battle of win/lose?
- 29/03/2010 09:03:07 PM
2486 Views
*considers employing the Chewbacca defense*
- 29/03/2010 09:28:06 PM
2487 Views
Re: *considers employing the Chewbacca defense*
- 29/03/2010 09:44:58 PM
2661 Views
The final point explains the "defense"
- 30/03/2010 12:24:56 AM
2413 Views
Re: The final point explains the "defense"
- 30/03/2010 01:33:04 PM
2340 Views
No, no, no
- 30/03/2010 06:38:41 PM
2407 Views
Re: No, no, no
- 30/03/2010 07:51:34 PM
2513 Views
Still continuing, huh?
- 31/03/2010 02:10:13 AM
2453 Views
Re: Still continuing, huh?
- 31/03/2010 03:56:57 PM
2437 Views
He's now reviewed the third book
- 26/03/2010 12:27:16 PM
2664 Views
Well, this time I must disagree with him
.
- 29/03/2010 07:31:40 AM
2374 Views
.
- 29/03/2010 07:31:40 AM
2374 Views
I don't think he was claiming that RJ was alone in doing that
- 29/03/2010 07:44:07 AM
2388 Views
Hah!
- 29/03/2010 06:07:28 PM
2392 Views
Well...
- 29/03/2010 06:52:10 PM
2315 Views
Differing perspectives, I guess.
- 29/03/2010 07:58:13 PM
2498 Views
I suppose
- 29/03/2010 08:50:43 PM
2417 Views
Re: I suppose
- 30/03/2010 12:18:30 AM
2549 Views
Hey, DomA, do you know why the Shienarans randomly speak in the Old Tongue?
- 30/03/2010 12:52:01 AM
2387 Views
Re: Hey, DomA, do you know why the Shienarans randomly speak in the Old Tongue?
- 30/03/2010 07:45:08 AM
2568 Views
But why only them?
- 30/03/2010 08:07:00 AM
2480 Views
The Shadow Rising review
- 02/04/2010 09:42:53 AM
2678 Views
I wonder if this borders on trolling
- 02/04/2010 02:29:58 PM
11212 Views
That would be a mistake
- 02/04/2010 09:16:25 PM
2682 Views
Re: That would be a mistake
- 02/04/2010 10:28:56 PM
2429 Views
I agree, Roberts is more and more coming across to me as just bitter
- 10/04/2010 01:24:52 AM
2536 Views
Little late to this one as well
- 10/04/2010 11:12:04 AM
2565 Views
Perhaps you should have led with this bit
- 10/04/2010 02:52:23 PM
2654 Views
I guess I just presumed that people would read the header to his blog
- 12/04/2010 03:54:10 AM
2471 Views
- 12/04/2010 03:54:10 AM
2471 Views
What review? I couldn't find one...
- 02/04/2010 08:00:45 PM
2640 Views
Re: What review? I couldn't find one...
- 02/04/2010 09:22:13 PM
2634 Views
See my comment below
- 02/04/2010 09:32:54 PM
2704 Views
Re: See my comment below
- 03/04/2010 09:31:22 AM
3037 Views
Sorry I'm late in responding, but I've been quite busy this week
- 07/04/2010 09:45:48 PM
2885 Views
Speaking of irritation
- 02/04/2010 10:50:04 PM
2588 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
2507 Views
Commentary, then?
- 02/04/2010 09:27:18 PM
2469 Views
- 02/04/2010 09:27:18 PM
2469 Views
Here's the thing...
- 02/04/2010 10:11:18 PM
2419 Views
Re: Here's the thing...
- 02/04/2010 10:31:56 PM
2262 Views
Re: Commentary, then?
- 05/04/2010 03:44:07 PM
2375 Views
- 05/04/2010 03:44:07 PM
2375 Views
for a man that bitterly complains about an author who is padding his work
- 08/04/2010 09:41:07 PM
2603 Views
1400 words is long-winded?
- 09/04/2010 10:07:41 AM
2649 Views
- 09/04/2010 10:07:41 AM
2649 Views
since you can sum up those 1400 words in about 25 yes that's longwinded
- 09/04/2010 01:36:16 PM
2514 Views
Except I didn't really sum it up, as I left out quite a bit
- 10/04/2010 11:15:42 AM
2544 Views
You are very defensive over this
- 10/04/2010 01:54:15 PM
2340 Views
Nah, more of a devil's advocate than anything else
- 12/04/2010 03:57:12 AM
2396 Views
Well Larry I have started reading Gradsil by Adam Roberts
- 07/04/2010 08:59:28 PM
2572 Views
I demand a paragraph by paragraph review, with footnotes!
- 07/04/2010 09:50:39 PM
2462 Views
Re: I demand a paragraph by paragraph review, with footnotes!
- 08/04/2010 01:06:20 PM
2321 Views
Which Invisible Man?
- 09/04/2010 09:58:44 AM
2532 Views
He brings up some interesting points, if in an unnecessarily rude manner
- 08/04/2010 12:42:25 PM
2454 Views
To be honest, I doubt most readers of the series obsess over it that much
- 09/04/2010 10:05:49 AM
2487 Views
- 09/04/2010 10:05:49 AM
2487 Views
Re: To be honest, I doubt most readers of the series obsess over it that much
- 09/04/2010 01:28:17 PM
3013 Views
- 09/04/2010 01:28:17 PM
3013 Views
Re: To be honest, I doubt most readers of the series obsess over it that much
- 10/04/2010 11:40:22 AM
2490 Views
- 10/04/2010 11:40:22 AM
2490 Views
why are you so bothered by people being unimpressed with Roberts?
- 10/04/2010 02:19:08 PM
2480 Views
Not bothered as much as I am bemused by the ad hominems, to be honest
- 12/04/2010 04:11:12 AM
2785 Views
And in vol. 5, Roberts discovers the horrors of the circus
- 09/04/2010 09:57:03 AM
2458 Views
Basically he just states the "nothing happens"-argument...
- 09/04/2010 03:26:02 PM
2349 Views
Well, what was really resolved here?
- 10/04/2010 11:25:25 AM
2442 Views
Well...
- 12/04/2010 05:05:20 PM
2557 Views
So very little was resolved and much was set into motion, then?
- 12/04/2010 06:55:45 PM
2528 Views
Yes...
- 12/04/2010 10:51:08 PM
2250 Views
Ever read Umberto Eco's How To Travel with a Salmon?
- 12/04/2010 11:07:19 PM
2607 Views
I guess...
- 13/04/2010 10:03:03 AM
2589 Views
Sounds like you value prolixity for the sake of prolixity, to be honest
- 13/04/2010 04:41:07 PM
3709 Views
Nah...
- 13/04/2010 05:29:34 PM
2266 Views
He's read and enjoyed Proust, among others
- 13/04/2010 07:37:39 PM
2391 Views
Ah, well...
- 13/04/2010 09:45:45 PM
2310 Views
Dismissive, much?
- 13/04/2010 10:52:30 PM
2507 Views
- 13/04/2010 10:52:30 PM
2507 Views
About that bifurcation...
- 14/04/2010 02:02:15 AM
2471 Views
Sorry that I was busy yesterday and didn't have a chance to reply until now
- 15/04/2010 01:46:54 PM
2594 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
2465 Views
Lord of Chaos commentary
- 16/04/2010 03:39:39 PM
2445 Views
No no. It was Lord of Heaven!
- 16/04/2010 05:51:11 PM
2329 Views
Yeah, I noticed that
- 16/04/2010 11:16:26 PM
2268 Views
- 16/04/2010 11:16:26 PM
2268 Views
I would love the see him review Goodkind...
- 16/04/2010 11:51:07 PM
2485 Views
I don't wish that on anyone who doesn't have copious amounts of alcohol
- 16/04/2010 11:57:41 PM
2395 Views
A Crown of Swords - or is it deco-porn?
- 23/04/2010 08:36:17 AM
2511 Views
Re: A Crown of Swords - or is it deco-porn?
- 29/04/2010 06:02:28 PM
2452 Views
I disagree
- 29/04/2010 09:34:49 PM
2279 Views
The Path of Daggers commentary
- 07/05/2010 10:39:03 AM
2596 Views
Winter's Heart
- 21/05/2010 12:46:14 PM
2584 Views
I think WH was my least favorite of the WoT novels I re-read
- 21/05/2010 04:49:31 PM
2431 Views
Re: I think WH was my least favorite of the WoT novels I re-read
- 25/05/2010 05:05:09 PM
2580 Views
WH was my least favorite novel in the series, and that is saying a lot.
- 28/05/2010 03:15:13 PM
2411 Views
I completely agree with his KoD post. Here is my favorite quote:
- 28/05/2010 03:08:31 PM
2754 Views
Roberts reflects back on WoT 1-11, with answers to questions asked of him
- 25/06/2010 12:51:29 PM
2560 Views
This guy should be burned at the stake
- 25/06/2010 03:22:34 PM
10051 Views
Are you done making a fool out of yourself, Mark?
- 26/06/2010 06:53:37 PM
2485 Views
Oh come on...
- 26/06/2010 09:06:01 PM
2552 Views
Well, the burning at the stake was a bit much...
- 26/06/2010 10:19:40 PM
2546 Views
Well, really! You brought the comment to his notice...
- 26/06/2010 11:34:08 PM
2548 Views
And your point is...?
- 27/06/2010 12:37:00 AM
2584 Views
Well...
- 27/06/2010 05:38:12 AM
2510 Views
Indeed... I think it's rather clear that Larry's goal has been to cause trouble
- 27/06/2010 10:57:36 AM
2692 Views
It's not about honour being beschmirched. It's about poor quality arguments. *NM*
- 30/03/2011 04:09:23 PM
1413 Views
One year later...
- 27/03/2011 03:40:29 AM
2392 Views
Re: One year later...
- 28/03/2011 05:03:32 PM
2633 Views
I see you subconsciously support critical takes.
- 28/03/2011 11:41:48 PM
2613 Views
No I conciously support telling you and him that you are pathetic, arrogent, & jelous. *NM*
- 30/03/2011 01:40:36 PM
1451 Views
Jealous?
- 30/03/2011 05:20:32 PM
2406 Views
You both are jelous of Jordan's tremendous succes.
- 30/03/2011 10:27:36 PM
2397 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
2433 Views
The fact that you teach is supposed to be a surprise?
- 31/03/2011 01:23:45 PM
2344 Views
After reading the standard-issue checklist of generic, tossabout pejoratives...
- 01/04/2011 03:06:18 PM
2504 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
1367 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
1489 Views
Yep!
- 30/03/2011 05:16:38 PM
2324 Views
- 30/03/2011 05:16:38 PM
2324 Views
He's not an "author", he's just a stupid troll, do not feed him *NM*
- 30/03/2011 02:39:19 PM
1379 Views

