The Eye of the World question

I have to agree with RMF about the female characters in WOT. They are pretty much all bossy, annoying and one dimensional. However, despite this and despite the rather dull middle books, it is still one of the best fantasy series out there.

However, it shouldn't be compared to ASOIAF not because of the quality of the writing or characterization but because they are different types of fantasy. ASOIAF is realist fantasy and WOT is high. Given that you consider ASOIAF better than Lord of the Rings (by the way, sacrilege), which is also high fantasy, you might find Malazan Book of the Fallen by Stephen Erickson or The Black Company by Glen Cook more to your taste. Personally, Malazan is my favourite but, be warned, it has a cast of thousands and no character is safe.

I think The Wheel of Time is a greater, richer series.

I admit you need force of will to start the series because Book 1 is just kind of a prelude to the whole saga, but after that it's the best I've ever read. (And don't go running to my profile, I've created my aacount today xD).

What you need to know about tWoT is that the story goes far beyond clasic plain fantasy and grows around strong philosophic principles. Some of them like the always present duality good-evil are easy to catch, others are more subtle, but at the end of the series you haven't just read an epic fantasy, you've read a philosophic disertation of how RJ sees/whishes the world was.

Also, Jordan's writting is slow and very detailed. If you don't like this don't bother, you'll waste your time. This doesn't mean there's no action, it means that the action is so detail-full that if you don't like detailed writting it may seem like you don't advance, but I for example love how great his descriptions are.

Also, the characters are a little simplier than in Game of Thrones, but it's not a matter of author's capability. The characters are how they are for a reason, and all of them evolve a lot through the series.

You also need to know that some people say it can be very boring to read through some books, but thats just bullshit. Sorry, I had to say it. The reason some people say that is because there are books where only some of the main characters (which are a damn lot, it's a world so rich) appear, and that may be frustrating if you don't like that characters. But a good reader understands that if Jordan is able to make you hate a character it means that the character is as well done as the ones we love. To create an emocional conection reader-character the character has to be very well written. I enjoyed those books with only hatefull characters as much as the others because it's as good.

Rober Jordan perfectioned the world Talkien began to create. The Wheel of Time is the greatest epic fantasy saga of our time.

PD: Sorry for my english. Not native.

Fatin wrote: "WoT is written much much much better than ASoIaF.
I don't think that killing of characters and all the blood and gore is a bad thing, I actually love it, but only when it serves the story.
I prefe..."

GRRM's work is described as gritty and realistic by most fans and reviewers. In as such as they are meant to reflect the realities of human existence, and in the real world not all deaths have meaning and purpose. Lives are often cut short leaving goals unachieved. Heroes fall to villains(or even random accidents) without making a great sacrifice that would redeem their loss.

Brian wrote: "If the first book sucked...why waste our time trudging through the remainder of the series?

Honestly, if the writer can't bring his "A" game for the start..."

Writing style is not a static quantity. It can improve or devolve over time, as the writer gains confidence, accepts input and criticism as to how to refine it, or (in the negative case) just stops giving a damn and shits out books for the payday. Simply reading a single book by an author and saying "This person is a lousy writer!!!" is just lazy (unless the author is Stephenie Meyers... then it's justifiable).

Jordan is far from perfect. He drags on later in the series where he should have been pushing the story harder. Books 7 through 10 are just so painful, because so many pages are written, and yet so little actually happens.

He is, however, much better than Martin in that he actually had an ending plotted out in advance... he knew where the story needed to end. Martin is making shit up as he goes along, and it's painfully obvious that he's never going to finish unless someone puts a gun to his head and forces him to.

I really think it depends on what you like.

GoT is not a series I could read, too much violence and loss of many main characters, which spoils things for me.
Also, not enough magic :P

WoT, as a series does drag and moves fairly slow, but it also has great character development.and engaging magic filled story line. Its standard fantasy, but one of the best

I have never really found the "if you like X series, you will like Y series" recommendations to really work in fantasy. Especially if you're looking at epic fantasy series.

The only things Wheel of Time and Game of Thrones have in common are that they're both EPIC series and the authors were/are intent on dragging it out for as long as possible.

Wheel of Time captured my imagination when I was still in school. I'm not sure I would feel the same way if I were a new reader now. There's a lot of world-building which I still admire to this day. But it gets boring about midway in the series and it takes an act of sheer will and determination to hurdle over the deadweight to get to the ending (which I have heard is excellent, but I'm still working on getting over the hurdle).

Game of Thrones was something I started to read around uni days. It starts off compelling and gritty and is quite fast paced in comparison to WOT. There is world building but perhaps not as complex as WOT. I got bored with this series too. I will probably wait for this series to end before I contemplate reading it fresh again.

Andrew wrote: "Hang on a second RMF, you only read 500 pages out of the whole series. Yet you can slag off 14 books you haven't even read?
Looking at your profile shows you've written 3 books, of which there ha..."

I've been told by many a WOT fan that the first book is the best in the series. Reading the eye of the world was like wading through treacle. Reading a game of thrones was like driving a sports car down a motorway.

Given that the average person only reads 3900 books in their life time (one book a week for a life expectancy of 76 years) do I have time to plough through a 15 book series at 800 pages a book? Especially when the first 500 pages of book 1 were so so? Life's is too short for that.

Let me make it clear that although I do not like the series (obviously) I will always respect other people's rights to enjoy this series. Don't let my views put you off. Opinions are like rear ends - everybody has one.

Bill wrote: "Brian wrote: "WOT is a teen fantasy book series..."

R.M.F wrote: "The plot is lifted straight out of the Fellowship of the ring..."

These responses prove that you never made it past the first boo..."

But the plot of the first book is lifted straight from the fellowship of the ring.

Brian wrote: "If the first book sucked...why waste our time trudging through the remainder of the series?

Honestly, if the writer can't bring his "A" game for the start...

And why "prove" anything? I explicit..."

My thoughts exactly.

Brolie wrote: "Don't hold STRONG opinions on things you know little to NOTHING about."

And yet the First Amendment would say otherwise.

R.M.F wrote: "Andrew wrote: "Hang on a second RMF, you only read 500 pages out of the whole series. Yet you can slag off 14 books you haven't even read?
Looking at your profile shows you've written 3 books, of..."

Tbh, the first was not the best imo, It was good, but just. The prequel was very good, probably because it wasn't slow.

I read certain parts of WoT quite quick/skipping through overly descriptive/repetitive paragraphs, because they are slow to get through. I must admit I think Brondon saved the series and has done an amazing job at tying up loose ends.

My fav. books in the series, were the prequel, book 6, 11 and 13.

Looking wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "Andrew wrote: "Hang on a second RMF, you only read 500 pages out of the whole series. Yet you can slag off 14 books you haven't even read?
Looking at your profile shows you've writt..."

The first book badly needed an editor. A twenty per cent reduction could have made all the difference.

It's interesting how much fans vary from each other as much as fans and "non fans".... It's like 50% of WoT readers love book 6 and the other one's couldn't get past it. Lord of Chaos. It is exemplary of "dragging on" and "no story line" until the very very end. I've been in many debates with WoT fans about preferences so I think it's safe to say that each person has their own unique perspective on the books.

Pamela Su- I agree with you 100%. I read them when I was younger but had trouble taking them seriously as an adult.

R.M.F wrote: "But the plot of the first book is lifted straight from the fellowship of the ring."

So? How is that an indicator of the next 13 books? Any reasonable person would have stopped to think, "If the next 13 books (or however many there were when you started EotW) are the same plot repeated, why are so many people still reading this?"

Again, you're extrapolating an entire series, 14 books written by two separate authors and published over close to a quarter of a century, from a single novel. At best, your opinion is flawed.

I don't understand how people seem to like the Game of Thrones. I read the first 2 books. It had some interesting parts, but there doesn't seem to be a main character to root for. Every character that gets introduced dies shortly after. How does this make it good, just because he isn't afraid to kill characters in his books. That just doesn't make any sense to me.

Game of Thrones and The Wheel of Time are to completely different stories. You can't compare the 2. Robert Jordan IMO is a much, much better author then George R. R. Martin. It doesn't take talent to kill your characters, it takes talent to keep them alive. You have nothing invested in a character you just met, and is killed shortly after. Try killing a character that's been around for 6 books. That's much harder to do, and the reader cares about that character, and they will really feel the death of them dying. Of course, it has to be a good death, a death of meaning. Stupid deaths of good characters should be a crime. R. A. Salvatore did that once, and I haven't read another one of his books since. Killing off the main character in the middle of a series. How stupid can you get. You can no longer trust the Author after that.

It's like the movie the perfect storm. Everyone dies at the end. There is no point to this movie, other then greed kills. But everyone knows that. All those families lost husband's, brothers, and son's. For nothing. What a waste of time, and the movie was promoted as if they were heroes. Why, they weren't trying to save anyone's live, they were just trying to make money. So, the director kills everyone you met. How exactly is that good?

Iceblast wrote: "I don't understand how people seem to like the Game of Thrones. I read the first 2 books. It had some interesting parts, but there doesn't seem to be a main character to root for. Every character t..."

Approved :)

Iceblast wrote: "I don't understand how people seem to like the Game of Thrones. I read the first 2 books. It had some interesting parts, but there doesn't seem to be a main character to root for. Every character t..."

I could be mistaken,but I don't believe Martin has ever killed off a main character. At least one of his point of view characters.However I haven't read Dance with Dragons.

Benji wrote: "Iceblast wrote: "I don't understand how people seem to like the Game of Thrones. I read the first 2 books. It had some interesting parts, but there doesn't seem to be a main character to root for. ..."

I might be wrong (it has been a while) - but did not Ned Stark have POV in the first book?

SPOILER ALERT - don't read this if you haven't read all five ASOIAF books

yes, Ned Stark, as well as Catelyn was POV characters. But being a POV character doesn't mean being a main character. Sir Barristan Selmy was a POV character once, does it mean he is a main character? Hell no. And I'm sorry but I must say I hate that 'every favorite character dies' argument. Firstly, what is wrong with a good/favorite character dying? Must the good always triumph? Is it how it always happens in real life? No. So why is it such a big deal when it happens in fiction? Second, Tyrion is alive, Jon Snow is alive, Arya is alive, Dany is alive, Jaime is alive, Bran is alive, aren't those usually the fans' favorite? They all are alive. So what Robb is dead? Since when he was a main character? Yeah, we loved the guy but he was never a major character or anything. He has never even been a POV character. So what if Ned Stark is dead? His death was important to the story and though i was greatly saddened by his death and the Red Wedding, i would never give up on the series because of this.

I'm waiting for your list of 'main' characters who got killed off.

there's going to be SPOILERS below.

When you get attached to a character, it makes you want to read the next chapter. When you kill off a ton of characters, it eliminates rapport and lowers one's motivation to read the next chapter.

I have tons of favorite characters in the series that makes me keep going on. I named some of them above, there are others such as the Arianne Martell, Sand Snakes, the Tyrells, the Reed kids, Stannis, sir Davos, Gendry, Brienne, Asha Greyjoy, Sam, BlackFish, Sansa, Varys, Rickon, Mance Rayder all of which are very much alive. Ned or some other characters death didn't stop me from liking them or the series as a whole. It may have stopped you, but that's your problem not Martin's. there are some people who stopped reading the series after Martin killed off some good guys but the ones who kept going far outnumber the ones who gave up.


I find that he either kills them off because he doesn't know what to do with them, or for shock value, or as a plot device (like Ned).

Ned as well as Robb died because they made some very serious mistakes, stupid decisions and they trusted the wrong guys. I don't see anything remotely unexpected about Ned and especially Robb's deaths. i'm not saying it didn't surprise or upset me, but looking back at their actions, one could clearly see that coming. interesting that you would say that GRRM doesn't know what to do with his own characters/story. I mean, how do you know? Are you inside his head? Just because you don't like something doesn't mean GRRM doesn't know what he is doing. I think GRRM knew exactly what he was doing when he killed off those characters and it played out well. Sorry it didn't work out well for you, but again it's not GRRM's fault.

It is a total cop out to call it "realistic"

No, because that does never happen in real life, right? Good, honorable guys always win, even though odds are against them, right?Never have any honest man met a terrible and undeserved end, right? and just for information, even something similar to the red wedding has taken place in history, did you know that?

It's just a lack of imagination and skill on Martin's part. You know it's a bad book when you get mad at the author for what he's doing, not the characters. that's clearly your subjective opinion, i've seen countless people that would disagree with you.

Like someone said before--- it's easy to kill off a character, more difficult to keep them alive.

Really? how is that more difficult since in most of the books I've read where the characters 'manage' to stay alive do so with the help of a deus ex machina or some other plot device. what's difficult is to kill off some likable characters and manage to keep your fans interested and satisfied, in my opinion.

I'd personally prefer a bittersweet story to a 'and they lived happily ever after' one any day. And Martin has promised us that and he never pretended to do the opposite. So i don't know what exactly you are complaining about. If you don't like this kind of books, you shouldn't have picked it up in the first place.

By the way, you seem to be thinking that Brienne is dead, she was very much alive the last time I checked. which makes me wonder, have you read all five books?

Generally I don't read fantasy for realism. I read it to escape from the world. If I want realism I can watch the news. If I want murders all the time I can read police procedurals or murder mysteries (although they rarely kill off major/POV characters in those).

While there are times to "kill your darlings" you have to do so carefully. I'm ok investing some time in a character and having them killed off. Kim Harrison does this with a character or two in her Hollows series and it works.David Weber also kills off major characters in the Honorverse but when you are following some 100+ characters around under war time it's bound to happen and I find he does it in a way I've not felt betrayed. But if used too frequently or not done well I do believe it will cause a number of readers to start mistrusting the author and give up on the books/TV shows.

I can't comment directly on Martin's books or the show as I was unable to make it past the 1st chapter of book one as the violence was too high and graphic for me and based on reviews I knew it only got more so.

@Brolie

I went and looked through your shelves and it appears you've read all five books each of which is supersize monster. Martin must somehow manage to intrigue you because why else would someone keep on reading a lengthy series with no favorite character especially when they aren't sure that the author knows what he is doing.

I might be wrong (it has been a while) - but did not Ned Stark have POV in the first book?



Now that you mention it I believe Ned did have a pov. On a similar note Some characters have seemingly been killed off, yet return with a vengance I find these to be great plot twists.

Spoilers ...

I forgot about her saying the random "unknown word" or whatever to save her life. The negative thing I was remembering was her weird stuff about Sansa and the Hound. So yeah, I'm remembering that wrong. My memory must have just said that she probably did die. Tbh, I also just didn't care enough by the end to let it stick in my memory.

I read them for a book club. Plus I don't like to hold strong opinions about things I don't know anything about. I will give you the Brienne thing. You're absolutely right that she's alive (for now). But I have read all the books. It was torture, but I made it.

If I upset you so much that you felt the need to check my shelves, you must have also noticed that I am not particularly a fan of the fantasy genre, high or low. A friend got me on to Wheel of Time when I was younger, book club had me read Martin. I typically prefer to read books with more to them than just a story. And I think I have read a good enough variety of authors to be able to have my own opinions about what I like and what I don't. It wasn't that I didn't like that the characters died, it was the fact that he just keeps bloody doing it. Tedious and annoying. And now it's expected. It loses it's zest or impact (like someone also mentioned). Which is another reason I didn't like the books. Like I said in my last post, the killing off of so many characters is one of my many reasons for not liking the series. Couldn't even count the number of times I would sigh and roll my eyes at his choice of plot for the story- deaths aside.

These books would have made a great "Choose your own adventure" series though. If you would like to marry the foreign chick go to page 88, if you want to marry a Frey go to page 249. Would have been so much more enjoyable that way, don't you think?

Benji wrote: "I might be wrong (it has been a while) - but did not Ned Stark have POV in the first book?



Now that you mention it I believe Ned did have a pov. On a similar note Some characters have seemingly..."

Yes, Ned was a POV character in the book. And only two people that have been killed off have been "revived'.

Brolie wrote: "But I have read all the books. It was torture, but I made it."

I just hope your book club won't force the sixth book on you when it comes out. Because this series are clearly not 'your thing'. And that seems to be the only problem here. Instead of acknowledging it, you claim that the author doesn't know what he is doing anc killing off characters just 'cause which is wrong and you'd have known it to be so if you had paid attention to the books:)

Look I wasn't upset that so I went and checked your shelves, I was just curious if you've read the books since you made a wrong statement about one of the characters. I honestly don't care if people love this series or not, the fact that you don't like ASOIAF doesn't bother me in the least. What bother me is that people criticize it for wrong reasons such as 'it's too gritty', 'lots of characters die for no good reasons', 'nothing happens' and so forth.

WoT is written much much much better than ASoIaF.
I don't think that killing of characters and all the blood and gore is a bad thing, I actually love it, but only when it serves the story.
I prefer the tv series to the ASoIaF books, because of the shitty writing. They've also fleshed out characters in the show as opposed to the books. I also think Martin kills off characters for shock value, there are a few deaths that have been necessary but, I don't know. Book 5: (view spoiler)[I think Jon might be killed off and his parentage never talked about because so many readers have guessed, or that martin might change it because now it's been guessed (hide spoiler)]. Basically, I think Martin changes the story not to please the readers, but to anger and shock them. He should just stick to the story instead. Or maybe he hasn't really decided what to do with the story.
Jordan, on the other hand, I know his female characters can be a little annoying, but there was a change in them, they were also developed. That being said, I read most of the series when I was very young. I have reread enough passages to know the writing is better, also I don't remember ever feeling like the books were dragging, maybe because I had them lined up instead of waiting for them to come out. I did feel a little hazy reading the last book because I couldn't remember a few characters, but I enjoyed the outcome of the story, it was something different. I'm not talking about the character plots, but the plot of the story overall. BUT THERE ARE SO MANY QUESTIONS LEFT UNANSWERED. WHY IS JORDAN DEAD.

You are the first person I've seen that called Martin's writing 'shitty'. I personally love both his writing and characterization, but I respect your opinion nonetheless. As for shock value, I already explained it above, if someone can't put the clues together and draw a conclusion, it's not Martin's problem. Also Martin has said Jon's mother will be revealed eventually, so he would never kill him off just to avoid to answer that question. and isn't it kinda very obvious that Jon Snow is not dead?

As I haven't read WoT, I can't say anything about it, but from what I've heard about it, it sounds completely different from ASOIAF so I think comparing the two books that aren't similar in any way is wrong in the first place.

Nermin wrote: "I'm waiting for your list of 'main' characters who got killed off.

there's going to be SPOILERS below.

When you get attached to a character, it makes you want to read the next chapter. When yo..." you sir,have my vote for the next election. I don't even care where you'live

(side rant.. God i hate it when they make movies/tv shows from books.. Just isn't the same. The TV/movie sucks 99.999% of the time) End rant :P


Wheel of time series = Great series up till book 6-7 then drags endlessly along. One of those series where you slowly loose your mind asking yourself.. WTF was the author thinking.. I made a honest effort to drag myself along through the rest of the books but i gave up. Really.. The first few books are quite awesome. Then the series turned into something else.

Song of ice and fire series = Honestly don't know past the first book, It couldn't hold my interest.

Teresa wrote: "Brian wrote: "Good God, no.

WOT is a teen fantasy book series (and not a very good one, in my opinion). I say pass on it, but that's me. Try out the first book like I did. If you like it, go for i..."

I wouldn't say wheel of time is just for teenagers, however I would say that it appeals to a larger demograph than ASOIAF. People I wouldn't of expected to read fantasy have plowed through this series.

Brian wrote: "Good God, no.

WOT is a teen fantasy book series (and not a very good one, in my opinion). I say pass on it, but that's me. Try out the first book like I did. If you like it, go for it, if not, lea..."

What makes a fantasy series a "teen fantasy"? I have read WoT, but not Game of Thrones. Is the blood/gore/violence what makes Game of Thrones "adult" fantasy? Is the fact that the main characters of Wheel of Time start the series as late teenagers what makes that series for teenagers?

Nermin wrote: "I wouldn't call myself masochist and I definitely didn't slog through ASOIAF."

I was being playful. It was a tongue-in-cheek comment.

I wouldn't call myself masochist and I definitely didn't slog through ASOIAF.

Bill wrote: "Any reasonable person would have stopped to think, "If the next 13 books (or however many there were when you started EotW) are the same plot repeated, why are so many people still reading this?"

I'm sorry, I know this is months late in reply...but I'm in a cheeky mood. :)

... why are so many people still reading this?

Because we're masochists.

That goes for everyone who's slogging through GRRM's stuff too.

So there. :P

I have yet to read the game of thrones, so can't judge totally fair. I think the wheel of time is the most epic series to grace the surface of the planet and there is no contest. No book after it has left me so satisfied. The detail and characterization is not even comparable. i will give game of thrones a chance but i doubt i will feel the passion that i feel reading wot. Robert Jordan is a king among fantasy!

Jean-henri wrote: "I love game of thrones as well. I was not as impressed with Eye of the World, though it was still a good book. If you are waiting for the next book in the Song of Fire and Ice series, then Wheel of..."

Eye of the World is a rather slow book, really slice of life kind of book. You could say there are a lot of books like this in the series. But this one can feel pretty slow. The rest of the books usually feel faster then this.

Tip for anyone that plans to read The Wheel of Time series. Before you start, slow yourself down. Enter this world through the eyes of the characters, really put yourself in their shoes, in their time, this is a epic fantasy book. Horses and swords. No cars and cellphones. You have to imagine if you lived there, in this small village so far away from everything, that the royal tax collectors have been out to your village in generations, that you didn't even know your village was part of a kingdom. Your just living your little farmer life when 2 rich looking people on nice horses come to town. People like this you've only heard about in stories.

If you can really put yourself in the mindset of these characters, looking through only their eyes, and not your own, then you have a much greater chance of enjoying this series.

These books were written, when kids were playing board games, and cards, and spending most of their time outside playing for fun. They didn't really have computers, and cellphones didn't really exist. A lot of people didn't have cable tv, maybe only 3 to 5 channels to watch of local tv. For someone in that time, things were much slower, and this book fit that time a great deal more then it would fit today. Where information or entertainment is only a click away.

So, slow yourself down if you can, and enter this world better prepared. Really put yourself in the shoes of these characters, try to understand what their life is like, and how they see this world through their eyes.

I love game of thrones as well. I was not as impressed with Eye of the World, though it was still a good book. If you are waiting for the next book in the Song of Fire and Ice series, then Wheel of Time might be a good way to bide your time. Also:

"I love Game Of Thrones,I believe it to be superior to Lord Of The Rings in fact." -Blasphemy

Nobody's saying you should read the other books if you don't want to. They're saying you should read the other books IF you want to tell people what they're like.

It's like if somebody said "don't bother watching The Godfather, it's all about garden parties!" - "wait, have you watched past the first ten minutes?" - "no, but if I don't like the first ten minutes, why would I watch any more?"

Not reading more is your prorogative. But you can't pretend you have any meaningful comments to make about the series as a whole (or the author's oeuvre as a whole) if you've never read a meaningful proportion of the series! (You can, of course, say meaningful things about the first book - the problem is, a lot of WOT fans would agree with you about the first book anyway).

Wastrel wrote: "No, the two series are not alike in any way. The only similarity I would suggest (beyond length, and the presence of magic, and a broadly fauxdieval setting) is that both series try to conceal a lo..."

You make a lot of good points, but look at it from this point of view. If you've trudged through the 800 pages of Book 1 and found it lacking, why would you trudge through 2400 pages in the hope that the writing will pick up? Life's too short! :)

me?:D

Nermin- this discussion is about whether the Wheel of Time series is comparable to A Song of Ice and Fire. The fact that you haven't read Wheel of Time makes me question your presence here. If it is just to defend a series you like, that is all well and good, but it doesn't really serve it's purpose to the topic. The person who originally started this discussion already read and liked Song of Ice and Fire. If you want to debate Martin, please feel free to start a different discussion.

Massively off topic now.

I'll take some fault in that.

Bringing it back-- I don't think the two are similar enough to recommend one for the other. In my opinion, WoT is worth the read if it's your thing. I hate Stephen King for his over use of pointless prose, but I was never bothered by Jordan's prose. Martin had me checking to see when the chapter was over so I could put it down. He did not appeal to my taste whatsoever.

Fatin, I don't think ASOIAF is the best piece of literature ever written but I quite enjoy his prose. You may think it's bad or average. I don't. And I am not alone, you aren't alone either. So there's no point in arguing this.

I'll also be devestated if somehow he dies before finishing the series, I know he's told the producers the ending, though I'd rather read the ending than watching it. But if he dies before finishing the series or if something happens that the story will be untold, i'll be pissed off and depressed but eventually get over it and move on, I suppose. Or maybe not:) Anyway, i'll cross that bridge when I come to it:D

IMHO is better than Game of Thrones.

I'm with Michele. I couldn't finish GoT. The characters felt like cardboard cut outs. The only character that I had an interest in was killed off and I was left feeling like the author didn't care about his characters, so why should I. The writing was good, but simple to me.

I really liked the WoT series up to book 6. The writing was richer, but his fight scenes left something lacking with all the 'Dancing Crane meets Running Bull' descriptions. Other than that, and his drawn out descriptions of clothing, I loved the first five books. It would have been great if Jordan had written an ending in book 6. I ended up dropping the series after that one.

Brolie wrote: "When you get attached to a character, it makes you want to read the next chapter. When you kill off a ton of characters, it eliminates rapport and lowers one's motivation to read the next chapter. ..."

This was exactly my issue, Brolie! You said it better though.

What was the question?

No, the two series are not alike in any way. The only similarity I would suggest (beyond length, and the presence of magic, and a broadly fauxdieval setting) is that both series try to conceal a lot from the reader and incorporate elements of mystery and intrigue, much more than in most fantasy novels before them. [I think this is probably WOT's greatest asset]

I'd say that in purely literary terms, Martin is a considerably better writer - his prose is better, his characters are more complicated, his plots are more original and unpredictable. His books are also a lot more action-packed - even AFFC is a riot of action compared to the slower volumes of WOT. Having said that, his writing style is often less, for want of a better word, 'juicy' and eye-catching than Jordan's, and I think that his prose in his first book was actually quite bad, since he didn't feel entirely comfortable writing in that voice yet.

And although I'd generally prefer Martin to Jordan, it's completely ridiculous to pan Jordan on the basis of The Eye of the World alone. Yes, in most respects TEOTW is rubbish. It's badly written, and it's entirely derivative. It's also not at all representative of how good Jordan later became. I'd say you have to read at least up to the end of the fourth book before you can legitimately claim to know what Jordan is an isn't capable of.

People should also be aware that the common complaints about Martin killing off characters are also ridiculously hyperbolic. Yes, a host of minor background characters are killed off. But only one real protagonist is killed, plus two secondary characters (in one incident) that some people had become very attached to. Two plot twists in five long novels is hardly the sicilian vespers. [In fact, if anything he needs to kill more characters - he has an annoying habit of pretending to be going to kill someone and then reprieving them at the last moment]

Fun fact: Martin kills off a smaller percentage of his protagonists than Weiss and Hickman did in their Dragonlance novels back in the eighties. [Come to think of it - a vastly smaller percentage. Old pulp fantasy novels were brutal. Iirc, in the first seven books of that, (view spoiler)[of the seven original main characters, five of them die (or are trapped in hell), plus the main POV villain for good measure (hide spoiler)]]


Anyway, no, the two series are not equivalent to one another. If you want something closer to GRRM in style, I'd suggest Robin Hobb instead.

Maxine wrote: "I have to agree with RMF about the female characters in WOT. They are pretty much all bossy, annoying and one dimensional. However, despite this and despite the rather dull middle books, it is stil..."

I'm glad somebody agrees with me. Fantasy has been crying out for decent female characters for years. WOT did little to help this.