Holly ****, I can't believe I missed it in the news!Follow

Also true.

Although I did like the first couple of books, but thought (and still think) it should have been wrapped up as a trilogy.

No kidding. When my friend recommended the series to me, she called it and I quote, "Epic fantasy that leaves Tolkien ground in the dust."

Wha--huh?

Now, I'm all for excess verbiage on occasion, but I would like that verbiage to actually have a point once in a while, y'know?

And people watch American Idol. People are retards.

Crap! Smash and I agree on something.

Quick! Get the staple guns and duct tape. The universe is bound to start falling apart any minute now...

the wheel of time was more than a story. it was a style. like tolken, jordan spent alot of time with description. setting up the abiance, the emotions behind decisions, the after thoughts and forthoughts that led not only yo understanding the words and actions of the characters he created, but understanding the thought process that led to those decisions.

it helped you identify more clearly with the characters in this world of instant gratification books where it is the action that counts and not the substance.

he was a very sucessfull, very disiplined writer. one of the best of our time.

but i wouldnt expect anyone here to be able to see that. his characters didnt wear purple armor, or carry 10 foot tall swords, and that didnt have dialog that always ended with "boitch" or "noob".

long winded? only if you were more interested in the action than understanding the characters and the world they lived in. "the hobbit" was long winded too in that reguard.

a book isnt as much about a story as it is a vehicle to take you into another world. if you dont take the time to see the world, or the writer doesnt take the time to describe the world and how it works, you are missing the best bart of the story. its not the swinging of the sward that makes the book, its the world it was swung in, and the thought process that went into swinnging it that is the story. that makes the differance between a good writer and a paperback short story you might read in readers digest.

jordan was one of the best writers of our time. he will be missed by people who know the differance between finger paints and real works of art.

Rubbish, after book six it was over endulgent, whiney psudopolitical crap of the like not seen outside of Elizabeth Moon novels.

You don't set scenes by spending 3 pages describing what a periferral charicter is clothed in. You don't create ambiance by boring your readers to death while they try and work out which of the 150 "main" charicters you are waffling on about in this chapter.

No but if i had the inclination i could run through Rand's (and probably the 20 or so important Aei sedai's) entire wardrobe a\nd you could hardly count the Glass sword in Tare as being a "normal" sword, or for that matter Rands weapon of choise... you know that one made out of pure fire that he imagines into being at will. No the hobbits and for that matter LotR's long winded parts where generally scene setting or vital to the overall movement of the story.

Noone would argue the same for WoT which rambles aimlessly for 100's of pages on subject totally seperate and independant of what most readers would consider interesting and important to the story.

I would say the same of S donaldson's Chronicals of Thomas Covenant, which are equally long winded but always remain on the central story and you remain interested the side issues because they do not take over the main story, which is the main overriding fault of WoT. Side story's should never interupt the thrust of the main story, certainly for no more than one chapter,

He'll be missed by fanboi's who have no idea what a good series of books is.

those of us that do have been missing him since book six, he effectively died then.

"the hobbit" was long winded too in that reguard.

The Hobbit is 300 pages long. It took Jordan 300 pages to describe "Lan"'s forehead as looking like a "Thundercloud" for the 1000th time.

Rubbish, after book six it was over endulgent, whiney psudopolitical crap of the like not seen outside of Elizabeth Moon novels.

You don't set scenes by spending 3 pages describing what a periferral charicter is clothed in. You don't create ambiance by boring your readers to death while they try and work out which of the 150 "main" charicters you are waffling on about in this chapter.

----------------------------------------------------------

and you cant entertain someone with descritpion when all they are looking for is bloodletting.

its a matter of taste, like all art. the millions of books he sold is testament enough to his sucess. i dont need to defend him. especailly here.

its a matter of taste

Yes.

However, something being a "matter of taste" doesn't make all opinions equally valid, it merely implies that there may be more than one valid opinion. For instance, here, the opinion "I almost died from choking on my own vomit after reading the first page of 'Eye of the World'" is valid, as is "I enjoyed some of the books while realizing the actual writing was painfully bad". With the exception of highly evolved masochism, though, the opinion "Jimmy Ringly was a talented author" is not in any way shape or form valid. To hold such an opinion requires either 1)Said highly developed sense of masochism and desire to suffer, 2)Severe mental retardation resulting in literally seeing different words than those on the page, or as in your case, 3)No actual opinion, but a desire to be contrary for it's own sake to no particular end other than seeming to be functionally retarded.