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
13147 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
2584 Views
My problem with the reviews:
- 20/03/2010 06:29:08 AM
3246 Views
Hear Hear !!!
.......................
=
........................ *NM*
- 20/03/2010 06:37:11 AM
1531 Views
.......................
=
........................ *NM*
- 20/03/2010 06:37:11 AM
1531 Views
well I agree and disagree
- 20/03/2010 06:51:29 AM
2950 Views
Re: well I agree and disagree
- 20/03/2010 02:12:43 PM
2488 Views
I'm amused by some of the responses
- 20/03/2010 07:20:03 PM
2898 Views
Are you suggesting that we are unqualified to disagree with him ?
- 20/03/2010 11:21:44 PM
2614 Views
No, I said rather that it's ridiculous to make such disparaging comments about his takes
- 20/03/2010 11:37:56 PM
2631 Views
I will reply to myself: What's the problem McFly , chicken ?
- 21/03/2010 12:29:36 AM
2442 Views
My sister called me chicken once
- 10/04/2010 01:18:31 AM
2492 Views
Re: I'm amused by some of the responses
- 23/03/2010 04:50:42 PM
2547 Views
And I'm even more amused by this response
- 24/03/2010 01:11:50 AM
2458 Views
- 24/03/2010 01:11:50 AM
2458 Views
On a completely unrelated note...
- 24/03/2010 06:15:25 AM
2351 Views
Ha!
- 24/03/2010 06:34:48 AM
2366 Views
- 24/03/2010 06:34:48 AM
2366 Views
My congratulations then
. *NM*
- 24/03/2010 06:36:11 AM
2302 Views
. *NM*
- 24/03/2010 06:36:11 AM
2302 Views
Wow, you guys have completely missed the point of the Wheel of Time series
- 22/03/2010 05:28:07 PM
2516 Views
- 22/03/2010 05:28:07 PM
2516 Views
There's a point to it?
- 22/03/2010 06:47:12 PM
2495 Views
- 22/03/2010 06:47:12 PM
2495 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
1488 Views
You're not taking me seriously now, are you?
- 24/03/2010 02:54:37 AM
2421 Views
- 24/03/2010 02:54:37 AM
2421 Views
I meant the reason why RJ wrote WoT in the first place
- 24/03/2010 06:39:47 AM
2410 Views
And which, arguably, could be viewed as being done in a hackneyed way
- 24/03/2010 07:15:55 AM
2471 Views
I thought the point was to write about a bunch of stuff happening?
- 09/04/2010 03:42:49 PM
2478 Views
pfft wth-ever
- 26/03/2010 12:35:53 AM
2292 Views
Dude's been up for more awards for his writing than RJ ever was
- 26/03/2010 12:28:19 PM
2554 Views
bla bla bla
- 29/03/2010 06:17:07 AM
2448 Views
Wow. That post was more entertaining than Mr. Roberts' review. Thank you
*NM*
- 29/03/2010 08:23:41 AM
1670 Views
*NM*
- 29/03/2010 08:23:41 AM
1670 Views
You must have low standards for entertainment
- 29/03/2010 08:54:03 AM
2376 Views
Re: You must have low standards for entertainment
- 29/03/2010 09:13:44 AM
2479 Views
I know you were, thus the
at the least of my comment
- 29/03/2010 09:19:30 AM
2322 Views
at the least of my comment
- 29/03/2010 09:19:30 AM
2322 Views
Unimpressed
- 29/03/2010 10:50:07 PM
2772 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
2778 Views
Re: Dude's been up for more awards for his writing than RJ ever was
- 29/03/2010 04:32:23 PM
2490 Views
Might want to re-read their Wikis again.
- 29/03/2010 07:07:11 PM
2340 Views
Awards
- 29/03/2010 07:42:03 PM
2300 Views
That link is out of date
- 29/03/2010 07:54:56 PM
2292 Views
Re: That link is out of date
- 29/03/2010 08:22:03 PM
2428 Views
This is a battle of win/lose?
- 29/03/2010 08:47:54 PM
2332 Views
Re: This is a battle of win/lose?
- 29/03/2010 09:03:07 PM
2368 Views
*considers employing the Chewbacca defense*
- 29/03/2010 09:28:06 PM
2353 Views
Re: *considers employing the Chewbacca defense*
- 29/03/2010 09:44:58 PM
2567 Views
The final point explains the "defense"
- 30/03/2010 12:24:56 AM
2260 Views
Re: The final point explains the "defense"
- 30/03/2010 01:33:04 PM
2222 Views
No, no, no
- 30/03/2010 06:38:41 PM
2285 Views
Re: No, no, no
- 30/03/2010 07:51:34 PM
2398 Views
Still continuing, huh?
- 31/03/2010 02:10:13 AM
2352 Views
Re: Still continuing, huh?
- 31/03/2010 03:56:57 PM
2312 Views
He's now reviewed the third book
- 26/03/2010 12:27:16 PM
2543 Views
Well, this time I must disagree with him
.
- 29/03/2010 07:31:40 AM
2268 Views
.
- 29/03/2010 07:31:40 AM
2268 Views
I don't think he was claiming that RJ was alone in doing that
- 29/03/2010 07:44:07 AM
2262 Views
Hah!
- 29/03/2010 06:07:28 PM
2286 Views
Well...
- 29/03/2010 06:52:10 PM
2193 Views
Differing perspectives, I guess.
- 29/03/2010 07:58:13 PM
2388 Views
I suppose
- 29/03/2010 08:50:43 PM
2292 Views
Re: I suppose
- 30/03/2010 12:18:30 AM
2434 Views
Hey, DomA, do you know why the Shienarans randomly speak in the Old Tongue?
- 30/03/2010 12:52:01 AM
2267 Views
Re: Hey, DomA, do you know why the Shienarans randomly speak in the Old Tongue?
- 30/03/2010 07:45:08 AM
2451 Views
But why only them?
- 30/03/2010 08:07:00 AM
2349 Views
The Shadow Rising review
- 02/04/2010 09:42:53 AM
2528 Views
I wonder if this borders on trolling
- 02/04/2010 02:29:58 PM
11084 Views
That would be a mistake
- 02/04/2010 09:16:25 PM
2548 Views
Re: That would be a mistake
- 02/04/2010 10:28:56 PM
2307 Views
I agree, Roberts is more and more coming across to me as just bitter
- 10/04/2010 01:24:52 AM
2415 Views
Little late to this one as well
- 10/04/2010 11:12:04 AM
2444 Views
Perhaps you should have led with this bit
- 10/04/2010 02:52:23 PM
2533 Views
I guess I just presumed that people would read the header to his blog
- 12/04/2010 03:54:10 AM
2352 Views
- 12/04/2010 03:54:10 AM
2352 Views
What review? I couldn't find one...
- 02/04/2010 08:00:45 PM
2498 Views
Re: What review? I couldn't find one...
- 02/04/2010 09:22:13 PM
2508 Views
See my comment below
- 02/04/2010 09:32:54 PM
2577 Views
Re: See my comment below
- 03/04/2010 09:31:22 AM
2896 Views
Sorry I'm late in responding, but I've been quite busy this week
- 07/04/2010 09:45:48 PM
2766 Views
Speaking of irritation
- 02/04/2010 10:50:04 PM
2476 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
2341 Views
Commentary, then?
- 02/04/2010 09:27:18 PM
2346 Views
- 02/04/2010 09:27:18 PM
2346 Views
Here's the thing...
- 02/04/2010 10:11:18 PM
2300 Views
Re: Here's the thing...
- 02/04/2010 10:31:56 PM
2142 Views
Re: Commentary, then?
- 05/04/2010 03:44:07 PM
2256 Views
- 05/04/2010 03:44:07 PM
2256 Views
for a man that bitterly complains about an author who is padding his work
- 08/04/2010 09:41:07 PM
2478 Views
1400 words is long-winded?
- 09/04/2010 10:07:41 AM
2521 Views
- 09/04/2010 10:07:41 AM
2521 Views
since you can sum up those 1400 words in about 25 yes that's longwinded
- 09/04/2010 01:36:16 PM
2394 Views
Except I didn't really sum it up, as I left out quite a bit
- 10/04/2010 11:15:42 AM
2427 Views
You are very defensive over this
- 10/04/2010 01:54:15 PM
2226 Views
Nah, more of a devil's advocate than anything else
- 12/04/2010 03:57:12 AM
2280 Views
Well Larry I have started reading Gradsil by Adam Roberts
- 07/04/2010 08:59:28 PM
2454 Views
I demand a paragraph by paragraph review, with footnotes!
- 07/04/2010 09:50:39 PM
2335 Views
Re: I demand a paragraph by paragraph review, with footnotes!
- 08/04/2010 01:06:20 PM
2193 Views
Which Invisible Man?
- 09/04/2010 09:58:44 AM
2422 Views
He brings up some interesting points, if in an unnecessarily rude manner
- 08/04/2010 12:42:25 PM
2355 Views
To be honest, I doubt most readers of the series obsess over it that much
- 09/04/2010 10:05:49 AM
2348 Views
- 09/04/2010 10:05:49 AM
2348 Views
Re: To be honest, I doubt most readers of the series obsess over it that much
- 09/04/2010 01:28:17 PM
2883 Views
- 09/04/2010 01:28:17 PM
2883 Views
Re: To be honest, I doubt most readers of the series obsess over it that much
- 10/04/2010 11:40:22 AM
2357 Views
- 10/04/2010 11:40:22 AM
2357 Views
why are you so bothered by people being unimpressed with Roberts?
- 10/04/2010 02:19:08 PM
2365 Views
Not bothered as much as I am bemused by the ad hominems, to be honest
- 12/04/2010 04:11:12 AM
2684 Views
And in vol. 5, Roberts discovers the horrors of the circus
- 09/04/2010 09:57:03 AM
2337 Views
Basically he just states the "nothing happens"-argument...
- 09/04/2010 03:26:02 PM
2229 Views
Well, what was really resolved here?
- 10/04/2010 11:25:25 AM
2326 Views
Well...
- 12/04/2010 05:05:20 PM
2445 Views
So very little was resolved and much was set into motion, then?
- 12/04/2010 06:55:45 PM
2396 Views
Yes...
- 12/04/2010 10:51:08 PM
2141 Views
Ever read Umberto Eco's How To Travel with a Salmon?
- 12/04/2010 11:07:19 PM
2467 Views
I guess...
- 13/04/2010 10:03:03 AM
2453 Views
Sounds like you value prolixity for the sake of prolixity, to be honest
- 13/04/2010 04:41:07 PM
3589 Views
Nah...
- 13/04/2010 05:29:34 PM
2150 Views
He's read and enjoyed Proust, among others
- 13/04/2010 07:37:39 PM
2256 Views
Ah, well...
- 13/04/2010 09:45:45 PM
2198 Views
Dismissive, much?
- 13/04/2010 10:52:30 PM
2373 Views
- 13/04/2010 10:52:30 PM
2373 Views
About that bifurcation...
- 14/04/2010 02:02:15 AM
2341 Views
Sorry that I was busy yesterday and didn't have a chance to reply until now
- 15/04/2010 01:46:54 PM
2473 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
2357 Views
Lord of Chaos commentary
- 16/04/2010 03:39:39 PM
2322 Views
No no. It was Lord of Heaven!
- 16/04/2010 05:51:11 PM
2220 Views
Yeah, I noticed that
- 16/04/2010 11:16:26 PM
2134 Views
- 16/04/2010 11:16:26 PM
2134 Views
I would love the see him review Goodkind...
- 16/04/2010 11:51:07 PM
2363 Views
I don't wish that on anyone who doesn't have copious amounts of alcohol
- 16/04/2010 11:57:41 PM
2257 Views
A Crown of Swords - or is it deco-porn?
- 23/04/2010 08:36:17 AM
2386 Views
Re: A Crown of Swords - or is it deco-porn?
- 29/04/2010 06:02:28 PM
2335 Views
I disagree
- 29/04/2010 09:34:49 PM
2161 Views
The Path of Daggers commentary
- 07/05/2010 10:39:03 AM
2479 Views
Winter's Heart
- 21/05/2010 12:46:14 PM
2453 Views
I think WH was my least favorite of the WoT novels I re-read
- 21/05/2010 04:49:31 PM
2304 Views
Re: I think WH was my least favorite of the WoT novels I re-read
- 25/05/2010 05:05:09 PM
2456 Views
WH was my least favorite novel in the series, and that is saying a lot.
- 28/05/2010 03:15:13 PM
2304 Views
I completely agree with his KoD post. Here is my favorite quote:
- 28/05/2010 03:08:31 PM
2628 Views
Roberts reflects back on WoT 1-11, with answers to questions asked of him
- 25/06/2010 12:51:29 PM
2421 Views
This guy should be burned at the stake
- 25/06/2010 03:22:34 PM
9898 Views
Are you done making a fool out of yourself, Mark?
- 26/06/2010 06:53:37 PM
2366 Views
Oh come on...
- 26/06/2010 09:06:01 PM
2435 Views
Well, the burning at the stake was a bit much...
- 26/06/2010 10:19:40 PM
2431 Views
Well, really! You brought the comment to his notice...
- 26/06/2010 11:34:08 PM
2435 Views
And your point is...?
- 27/06/2010 12:37:00 AM
2443 Views
Well...
- 27/06/2010 05:38:12 AM
2398 Views
Indeed... I think it's rather clear that Larry's goal has been to cause trouble
- 27/06/2010 10:57:36 AM
2579 Views
It's not about honour being beschmirched. It's about poor quality arguments. *NM*
- 30/03/2011 04:09:23 PM
1350 Views
One year later...
- 27/03/2011 03:40:29 AM
2261 Views
Re: One year later...
- 28/03/2011 05:03:32 PM
2502 Views
I see you subconsciously support critical takes.
- 28/03/2011 11:41:48 PM
2501 Views
No I conciously support telling you and him that you are pathetic, arrogent, & jelous. *NM*
- 30/03/2011 01:40:36 PM
1396 Views
Jealous?
- 30/03/2011 05:20:32 PM
2269 Views
You both are jelous of Jordan's tremendous succes.
- 30/03/2011 10:27:36 PM
2285 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
2317 Views
The fact that you teach is supposed to be a surprise?
- 31/03/2011 01:23:45 PM
2236 Views
After reading the standard-issue checklist of generic, tossabout pejoratives...
- 01/04/2011 03:06:18 PM
2391 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
1308 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
1435 Views
Yep!
- 30/03/2011 05:16:38 PM
2214 Views
- 30/03/2011 05:16:38 PM
2214 Views
He's not an "author", he's just a stupid troll, do not feed him *NM*
- 30/03/2011 02:39:19 PM
1324 Views

