[Arryn]

Endoperez,

It just goes to show you how plodding and relatively disorganized Jordan's books are that you can cut one in half or a third and not notice that the book has ended abruptly at a point where it shouldn't. Most of his books just end as if the publisher decided that it had enough chapters to go to print and any more must wait until the next installment. If I had written stories in college (for my creative writing classes) as Jordan does, I'd have failed. Not for the substance of the writing, but for the lack of plotline advancement. Jordan simply fails to grasp the (related) concepts of "getting to the point" and "too much of a good thing".

With regards to Hobb's Tawny Man trilogy (sequel to the Assassin trilogy), it's excellent writing but probably not quite as enjoyable for the simple reason that (I at least) found the story of the main character growing up (and being trained) to be fascinating. I think the sequel trilogy (which is quite good, Hobb is incapable of mediocre writing) would have been better if it had been written from the point of view of a student of Fitz, placing Fitz into role-reversal from that of the first trilogy. But I suppose that two trilogies of assassin training would probably have been too much.

I love the Eddings characters. They're memorable. But Eddings also suffers from a (much) milder case of the disease that afflicts Jordan: not getting to the point quickly enough, and too much of a good thing. At least, unlike Jordan, he does get there. Eventually. Eddings' books also have more action in them, so while they do ramble, it's not as tedious as reading Jordan.

[ January 22, 2004, 14:32: Message edited by: Arryn ]