I finally finished! Two years, 14 books, and 10k pages later, I now know how the Third Age ends (interesting that LotR also takes place in the Third Age).

Was it worth it? Yes. This series is compelling. The world is immersive and there’s a huge cast of different characters whose perspectives we get to experience.

There are some interesting themes and seeing how people from very different backgrounds think about them is an interesting way to explore them.

What’s the point?

Identity We follow some dramatic character arcs. Many people from very different cultures and of very different beliefs have to come to terms with changes in their circumstances or revelations about themselves that challenge their sense of self.

In some cases, the characters had to let go of limiting beliefs about themselves in order to adapt, while in others it was imperative that they remain true to themselves in order to succeed. It’s not always clear which is which, but often we can tell when a character is lying to him/herself. If each of us were more reflective and honest with ourselves, would it save us from a lot of bad decisions or anguish?

Dignity There’s a Smithean theme, very much along the lines of what @denlillaapan recently wrote about: man desires not only to be loved but to be lovely.

The book has characters from very different stations in life. Those who take their commitments seriously and perform their duties well, regardless of the prestige of their position, are always held in high regard by our protagonists. When one high-born character is brought low and eventually becomes a servant to one of our heroes, she surprises herself by not only gaining an appreciation of those who had served her previously but also finding dignity in the work she now had. Other characters who go through a similar change of circumstance, but end up serving those who are not lovely, find no such dignity.

There are also characters who agonize about not deserving the esteem they are held in. They are loved but don’t believe they are lovely. Ultimately, they have to figure out how to either live up to those perceptions or believe that they have earned them.

Heroic Sacrifice The story has several instances where heroic sacrifice is strategically advantageous. It usually plays out as something the bad guy doesn’t see coming because the bad guys have fundamentally selfish motives and their own death is equivalent to losing, while the good guys have higher motivations beyond themselves so they can win even if they don’t survive.

I hadn’t thought about sacrifice in such practical, game theoretic terms before. It makes sense, though, that a more powerful adversary can be defeated if they need to both kill you and survive themselves, while you only need to defeat them. (Slight spoiler) The sacrificing characters pretty much always survive and I’m not exactly sure what to make of that.

Goodness requires the temptation of evil This is probably the biggest philosophical point the author makes. I had never liked the claim that there can’t be good without evil.

Robert Jordan’s point is a bit more subtle and it makes sense to me. If people had no capacity to make evil choices, then there would be nothing commendable about not making evil choices. Further, if evil choices were not tempting, there would be nothing commendable about not making them. So, goodness requires both the capacity to do evil and the temptation to do so, or at least that’s the message as I understood it.

Summation

This is a great fantasy epic, most reminiscent to me of Lord of the Rings and Dune. The world is very well developed and the themes will be familiar from stories like those.

It is a monstrous undertaking, though.

cc: @samhainsam

https://stacker.news/items/1465932