Of course, I think he had more to it than that, but opinions vary, it seems




Well, it seems he's elaborated a little bit on these two points in his latest review. Whether or not that actually addresses what you raise is an entirely different matter



Or someone who seems to write his fetishes into the plot?



I disagree about the prose being "inoffensive." I have read all but the prequel (well, the novel form of it) and that's despite the prose, which is horrendous.



I differ with you on this, as I don't believe there's a good character development pattern to this series. Oh, the author may attempt to show this, but from what I recall (and my memory is fairly good, but 10 years' span from the last time I read books 1-9 is going to weaken it), the dialogues and internal monologues were rather monotonous and repetitive and did not show much in the way of the characters actively changing. But that's me on that, although I suspect that's an opinion that several readers of the series may share; I wouldn't really know for sure, though.





OK, I could see that, even if "changing the world" is a rather presumptuous thing outside of heroic fantasies, I guess



I think that got muddled a bit, particularly in the latter books, as I seem to recall thinking that it seemed they were repeating the same type of conversations, just with different supporting characters and that nothing had really changed.



If you mean multi-volume epic/heroic fantasies, perhaps. I seem to recall there being quite a few works from that era that touched upon several of those elements. Michael Moorcock I know worked politics into several of his stories from the 1960s onwards and Ursula Le Guin most certainly covered the latter two in her Earthsea novels of the 1970s.



Seems to me, again based on memory recall, that those others became more like more ponderous pieces of furniture there




Maybe in a week or two?




But what meaning will this have? I never really got the sense of a looming tragedy here, to be honest.



Don't quite get the Jon Snow reference, to be honest, as I remember him being fairly sympathetic throughout (but it's been 7-8 years since I last read a SOIAF book in full, so my memory in regards to that series is about as good as it may be for the earlier books of this one).



Maybe for Sanderson, but I doubt it strongly for others, as that motif has been around for a long time. Even in genre fiction, Moorcock I know played with it in "Behold the Man," although that story was much more explicitly religious in tone.




The only thing I expect when I read a review is that the reviewer has a discernible point of view based on his/her experiences with the work at hand.




Perhaps, or maybe the ancestral memory elements in the latter Dune novels would have come to mind here as well?



To be honest, if the Aiel are that important to the story, then the author(s) perhaps should have spent more time with them after the fifth book, as for whole books, there's barely anything at all referencing their inner conflicts over what is happening.



While some here are close to being up at arms with me because I do have a few derisory comments and some concrete basis for them, even if most of the points are debatable (as they should be)?



Interesting, as I recall reading some of them and finding them mildly irritating, but admittedly not worthy of dwelling on them.




I dunno. I do think he had some perceptive things to say, but what appeals to some is not going to appeal to others. Found it interesting how much he disliked the fifth book, though.




Ah, OK.



I wonder if those had quasi-fetish scenes in them as well






Fair enough.