*Spoilers* AMoL Ending Theory Discussion

No, there are 3 options:
1. The DO is the source of evil and Rand was right.
2. The DO is not the source of evil, thus Rand made a mistake.
3. [alternate theory] The DO is the result of evil, so Rand's choice is meaningless and a new DO would have been born when the earlier one killed.

Aulrick Vendour said:

No, there are 3 options:
1. The DO is the source of evil and Rand was right.
2. The DO is not the source of evil, thus Rand made a mistake.
3. [alternate theory] The DO is the result of evil, so Rand's choice is meaningless and a new DO would have been born when the earlier one killed.

Click to expand...

Three is interesting. Sorry I haven't responded, I've had no time

Aulrick Vendour said:

No, there are 3 options:
1. The DO is the source of evil and Rand was right.
2. The DO is not the source of evil, thus Rand made a mistake.
3. [alternate theory] The DO is the result of evil, so Rand's choice is meaningless and a new DO would have been born when the earlier one killed.

Click to expand...

Option 1 is does not reflect Rand's thinking. Rand does not believe the DO is the source of Evil.
Option 2 does not logically follow its own premise, because Rand does not believe the DO is the source of Evil.

Hammar O'Justice said:

Option 1 is does not reflect Rand's thinking. Rand does not believe the DO is the source of Evil.

Click to expand...

Evidence? That's not the impression I got from the way he behaves in his DO-less world (before he discovers that something is wrong).

Eluial Aldaran said:

Evidence? That's not the impression I got from the way he behaves in his DO-less world (before he discovers that something is wrong).

Click to expand...

Rand believes that the DO *is* Evil. I don't know how may different ways I have to say this in this thread, but I'll try it again.

The Dark One *is* Evil. He is not evil. He is Evil. Capital Letter Evil. Evil the noun, not evil the adjective. Evil is the Dark One. The Dark One is Evil. Finkel is Einhorn. He is not of Evil. He is Evil. He is the anthropomorphic representation of that force. Neither is the source of the other anymore than you are the source of yourself. Destroying one destroys the other because there is no "other." They are literally the same thing (if Rand is correct).

Edit: When I say "Rand believes" I mean Rand at the end of his interactions with the Dark One, not Rand as he is when he approaches Shayol Ghul.

Hammar O'Justice said:

Rand believes that the DO *is* Evil. I don't know how may different ways I have to say this in this thread, but I'll try it again.

The Dark One *is* Evil. He is not evil. He is Evil. Capital Letter Evil. Evil the noun, not evil the adjective. Evil is the Dark One. The Dark One is Evil. Finkel is Einhorn. He is not of Evil. He is Evil. He is the anthropomorphic representation of that force. Neither is the source of the other anymore than you are the source of yourself. Destroying one destroys the other because there is no "other." They are literally the same thing (if Rand is correct).

Click to expand...

Oh, ok. You're actually saying the same thing I am. Think I said more or less the same thing a few pages ago. I just didn't have any problem with the phrasing "source of" but I see your point. Saying something like "water is the source of water" makes no sense.

FINKEL IS EINHORN?????????? Oh my gosh I just laughed SO out loud all my co-workers are staring at me and now I have the giggles. LOVE YOU Hammar in Huntsville and I am in Fayetteville.

Except there is no other way to explain it but to say he's the source of evil.
People do evil things. Why? Are all the bad things they're doing actually the DO? That makes no sense. Is the DO an object? A noun? How do you define an action as a noun? I'm killing, so I'm DOing? That makes no sense to me.
If you define A as Evil and Evil as A, then everything Evil comes from A, which makes him... I suppose both the source AND the result of the action?
I already gave ample examples as to why this whole "no Evil without the DO" makes no sense, as basically everyone would die. I doubt RJ would have made such a paradoxical decision which makes so little sense.

Aulrick. Confirmation from Brandon that rand's world was correct. No DO means no choice. Will tell you more when I get home. On my phone at the signing.

OK. So, what I asked was:

In the BWB it's implied that human's don't need the DO to make evil choices. Is this true?

His response was that the DO isn't behind every evil action or choice, BUT that what Rand saw in the world he created was true. Without the DO there is no choice.

He *very explicitly* said that in RJ's notes it said no DO means no choice.

Well now I'm even more confused, and disappointed.
If the DO isn't behind every evil choice, how can there be no choice without him?

However, this seems to tell us straight out what I feared - the ending is to be taken at face value and really is just that badly written.

I can now officialy say that this is now my least favorite book in the series, and in my opinion one of the worst ending in fantasy ever.

It is badly put together, makes no sense, contradicts things we already knew and generaly is very anti climatic.

OK, well everyone ignored my hysterically laughing Finkel is Einhorn interjection totally aimed at MAKING PEACE AND CHANGING THE SUBJECT. *Is Gray all the Way*

Everyone hug.

Well now I'm even more confused, and disappointed.
If the DO isn't behind every evil choice, how can there be no choice without him?

Click to expand...

He isn't behind it in the sense that not everyone who murders or steals or does whatever else bad thing is doing so because the DO whispered to him, or because he's a dark friend or some other direct influence by the DO.

It is badly put together, makes no sense, contradicts things we already knew and generaly is very anti climatic.

Click to expand...

Well, to respond to the one part in there that isn't opinion, what does it contradict? Just the BWB, and we already knew that wasn't wholly trustworthy. And really, it doesn't even flat out contradict THAT. The BWB is based on knowledge only from within the pattern, and the pattern has always experienced the DO's presence. He hasn't always been able to touch the pattern, but he's always existed. So of course philosophers would think that having the ability to do bad things is inherent in human nature. In a sense, they're actually not wrong. Because if you take away that choice, you're no longer human (as being 13x13'd and Rand's DO-less world both showed us).

However, in this world, evil the noun, not the adjective, (to borrow Hammar's choice of words) is a REAL THING. As in, it's not merely a concept, it's the DO.

The way I've started to think about it, when the DO is able to touch the pattern (late AoL through end of 3rd age) he becomes personified. Because he now experiences time, it's easier to think of him as a person (though he is still not in the least human, but he has intentions, desires, can carry out actions and give orders and communicate, etc). This is Evil (noun) personified. When he's sealed away from the pattern, and no longer experiences time he's just Evil (noun). You can't be personified in any meaningful sense of the word if you don't experience time, but you can still be *something* -- a force, perhaps -- that exists and affects humanity. Timeless DO is more like gravity, where pattern-touching DO is more like how we traditionally picture the devil. (These are loose analogies, so please don't try to take them literally.)

However, this seems to tell us straight out what I feared - the ending is to be taken at face value and really is just that badly written.

I can now officialy say that this is now my least favorite book in the series, and in my opinion one of the worst ending in fantasy ever.

Click to expand...

As for all this, well, you're certainly entitled to that opinion, but I honestly don't see how else it COULD have ended. To be human is to make choices. Rand realizes that in the end. If he truly wants to save humanity he has to let them keep the choice to do bad things. I mean, THAT is what's so terrible about being 13x13'd. Not that it makes you do bad things (which, sure, is bad) but that it takes away your humanity. The worst dark friend, even the forsaken, is still more human than someone who has been forcibly turned. Likewise, this is why compulsion is so disgusting. It's a big theme in the books.

To me, the ending was incredibly powerful and meaningful. I think maybe you're still stuck in pre-last battle Rand mode, where he was like "End this once and for all! Evil must DIEEEEEEE!". You just need to come to the same realization he did, that there will always be a dark side to humanity. It's the struggle, not the resolution, that makes us what we are.

(BTW Brandon RAFO'd the question of whether 13x13'd people can be fixed, so hoping that shows up in the encyclopedia.)

Ok two questions. What the hell is RAFO'd and 13x13'd?

THEN EVERYBODY HUG DAMMIT. :grouphug

Raeviendha al'Toma said:

Ok two questions. What the hell is RAFO'd and 13x13'd?

THEN EVERYBODY HUG DAMMIT. :grouphug

Click to expand...

lol. Aulrick and I have an unspoken understanding. We're both head butters when it comes to arguments.

RAFO means "read and find out" it's something RJ used to say a lot when people asked him questions he didn't want to answer.

13x13 refers to people being turned to the DO using a circle of 13 channelers channeling through 13 fades

Also :grouphug

Eluial Aldaran said:

lol. Aulrick and I have an unspoken understanding. We're both head butters when it comes to arguments.

RAFO means "read and find out" it's something RJ used to say a lot when people asked him questions he didn't want to answer.

13x13 refers to people being turned to the DO using a circle of 13 channelers channeling through 13 fades

Spoiler

(such as they were doing in the black tower, and tried to do to Logain).

Also :grouphug

Click to expand...

Well now I just feel stupid. DUH.
Ack.

Eluial - I understand that everything it contradicts are things we know from inside the pattern (for example, the fact that the DO can't touch the world if he's sealed. Bt this ending, his existence itself makes the world what it is, which would make the whole "being sealed off" thing simply not true, and a misunderstanding of the DO nature), but I would have expected at least SOME forshadowing from the great master of all forshadowing, Robert Jordan himself.

As for it being anti climatic:
We were told that this would be the last battle - false. It's just another battle in an endless number of repeating battles (which I also consider to be contradictory to what we've been told, BTW, since we were clearly told that this would be THE last battle, not just "the last battle of the age" or "the last battle of Rand Al'thor").
We were told that Fain is a unique, unrepeating event in this age. He appears in no other age before or after this, nor in other 3rd ages (this was said by RJ himself) - pointless. When you make something as special as that, with all that he did in the series, you'd expect something a little... more... from him at the end.
We were led to believe that Rand will do something that was never done before: kill the DO! This was so heavily hinted on for several books now, until Rand said so himself in the last book. We ended up with Rand's story being completely ununique - there was no reason at all to tell his story and not the story of the Dragon in another 3rd age, by a different name. I'd expect there to be a reason why we read 14 books about these specific characters. We ended up getting the same repitition, nothing extraordinary happened whatsoever.

I have more, but you get my line of thought. It all feels so... Pointless.

Not sure why I used spoiler tags up there, lol. Whole thread is a giant spoiler.

ANYWHO...

Eluial - I understand that everything it contradicts are things we know from inside the pattern (for example, the fact that the DO can't touch the world if he's sealed. Bt this ending, his existence itself makes the world what it is, which would make the whole "being sealed off" thing simply not true, and a misunderstanding of the DO nature), but I would have expected at least SOME forshadowing from the great master of all forshadowing, Robert Jordan himself.

Click to expand...

Well, we've had this particular discussion, but again, don't take sealed off to have the same effect as non-existence. The DO can clearly be felt in some way or another inside the pattern even when he's sealed off, else the bore would never have been drilled because no one would have felt the True Power through the thin spot in the pattern.

But, most importantly, the proof is in the pudding. The DO is necessary for evil choice (as told to us by god AKA RJ, through his prophet Brandon Sanderson). People can make evil choices when he is sealed off (self evident from the AoL). Therefore, sealed off doesn't mean no influence whatsoever, it merely means he can't touch the pattern (and therefore gain the effects of a timeline) while he is sealed off.

Not clear exactly what it is you wanted foreshadowed, but if it's the whole choice thing, that most definitely has been there from the start.

We were told that this would be the last battle - false. It's just another battle in an endless number of repeating battles (which I also consider to be contradictory to what we've been told, BTW, since we were clearly told that this would be THE last battle, not just "the last battle of the age" or "the last battle of Rand Al'thor").

Click to expand...

Told by whom? Characters in the book. One thing RJ was amazing at was writing from different view points and staying true to those characters. If a character believed something it was stated as fact in their view points. Have enough characters believe something, and it's easy to see why we'd take it as fact.

But we're told time and again that there are no beginnings or endings to the wheel of time. Why should this go around be any different?

We were told that Fain is a unique, unrepeating event in this age. He appears in no other age before or after this, nor in other 3rd ages (this was said by RJ himself) - pointless. When you make something as special as that, with all that he did in the series, you'd expect something a little... more... from him at the end.

Click to expand...

Actually, Brandon commented on this, too, last night. He said RJ had written some notes on Fain's ending but had left it open to more, meaning Brandon could have added on if he wanted to. Fain's ending scene is what RJ wrote and Brandon did not add more "because there wasn't enough room" (exactly what he said). He said he thought about expanding on it, but that it was one of the many things that just didn't happen because of time/space in the book.

We were led to believe that Rand will do something that was never done before: kill the DO! This was so heavily hinted on for several books now, until Rand said so himself in the last book. We ended up with Rand's story being completely ununique - there was no reason at all to tell his story and not the story of the Dragon in another 3rd age, by a different name. I'd expect there to be a reason why we read 14 books about these specific characters. We ended up getting the same repitition, nothing extraordinary happened whatsoever.

Click to expand...

Sure. But there's no reason to tell another Dragon's story and not Rand's. This is the story that got told, this is the Dragon that got picked.

But I quite disagree with you that nothing extraordinary happened.

Eluial Aldaran said:

The DO is necessary for evil choice (as told to us by god AKA RJ, through his prophet Brandon Sanderson). People can make evil choices when he is sealed off (self evident from the AoL). Therefore, sealed off doesn't mean no influence whatsoever, it merely means he can't touch the pattern (and therefore gain the effects of a timeline) while he is sealed off.

Not clear exactly what it is you wanted foreshadowed, but if it's the whole choice thing, that most definitely has been there from the start.

Click to expand...

Has it now? Show me where please.

Told by whom?

Click to expand...

A fair question. I was under the impression that this was fortold by SEVERAL people, in prophecies. It's not called "The Last Battle" for nothing.

But we're told time and again that there are no beginnings or endings to the wheel of time. Why should this go around be any different?

Click to expand...

Exactly because of what I said - because if it's not, then why tell this story at all?

Actually, Brandon commented on this, too, last night. He said RJ had written some notes on Fain's ending but had left it open to more, meaning Brandon could have added on if he wanted to. Fain's ending scene is what RJ wrote and Brandon did not add more "because there wasn't enough room" (exactly what he said). He said he thought about expanding on it, but that it was one of the many things that just didn't happen because of time/space in the book.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I've heared that before... And I don't care.
Fain was a unique instence in the turning of the wheel. Do you know what this means? It means that time is not "just repeating itself." Things change, things happen. I expected something, we all did, and I really don't care WHY it didn't happen. It just didn't.

Sure. But there's no reason to tell another Dragon's story and not Rand's. This is the story that got told, this is the Dragon that got picked.

Click to expand...

And again, this answer is not good enough for me. When I read something, I want to know WHY I read it, not why I'm NOT reading something else. If you're bothering to write something so specific, foreshadow so much about Rand doing the impossible, add things that are unique to this turning like Fain, as if showing us that the repititeveness is about to change, I expect a change. Ending it with "Yeah, you know what, let's keep everything the way it is because for some reason the DO gives choice" is just anticlimatic to me. It really is.

But I quite disagree with you that nothing extraordinary happened.

Click to expand...

So what happened that was extraordinary? Do keep in mind that, since time is repititive, everything happened and will happen again, which makes it ordinary by default in my eye.

Sorry again for stepping out of the conversation at length then stepping back in. RL can go through its suck periods. I realize by this point the debate has now become about matters of preference and opinion, and thus can't really be logically argued anymore. But I feel like chiming in my views on the situation anyway:P

Aulrick, your complaint seems to be mainly about whether or not the ending jives with what was 'foreshadowed', especially with RJ being an apparent master of foreshadowing. But to me, a permanent end to the DO was not 'foreshadowed' at all. Foreshadowing implies laying out subtle clues well in advance so the observant reader can pick them up, or go back later and say "ah ha!, that's what that meant!". Like when Rand hit the trolloc with the mast in book 1, then had channeling sickness later on. I bet less than 1 in 20 readers got that the first time they saw it (and that group definitely excludes me), but it was very cool to look back on and think about after the fact.

Foreshadowing is not smacking you in the face with things. Rand wondering about the futility of the wheel, then saying directly in words "I'm gonna kill the DO!" is not foreshadowing. Rand THINKING he's going to do that, all the while the book is repeatedly making the point that balance in all things reigns supreme (saidin vs saidar, good vs evil, etc.), so that he can realize in the end that this is no different,: the world does not work well without balance...that is foreshadowing.