Author Topic: Alright guys, more inconsistencies I need explained  (Read 2084 times)

Cynewulf

  • Level 3
  • ***
  • Posts: 53
  • Fell Points: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Alright guys, more inconsistencies I need explained
« Reply #15 on: March 19, 2010, 11:06:20 PM »
That is nowhere near as bad as this, and various other descriptions of the area and army camps around Tar Valon, I would say. To me, the worst mistake Jordan has made is between book 4 and 5, when he forgot that he allowed Avendesora to survive the destruction unharmed, but then had it as "charred and burned" in the following book.

But I would perhaps have expected Sanderson to do his research a bit more meticulously before writings scenes such as this, and not do anything by "ear" the way he might have done if it were his own world. It took me about two minutes to find the relevant passages in TDR that describe this EXACT bridge, the area around, the "process" of crossing the bridge, and the gatehouse on the other side. It should not be that difficult to avoid errors in cases such as this, especially with the expertise available. But, again, it seems they rushed the book.

darxbane

  • Level 17
  • *
  • Posts: 839
  • Fell Points: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Alright guys, more inconsistencies I need explained
« Reply #16 on: March 20, 2010, 04:30:45 PM »
To answer some of these in no particular order:
The tower guard set up a blockade at the end of the bridge, which makes perfect sense as it is the one place where the opposing army can access the city. 

As for the bridge question; do we know whether or not the Island of Tar Valon is of a higher altitude than the main bank of the river?  It would make sense to build up the edges of the island to ensure no flooding occurred in the city itself, meaning that the bridge could arch upward but flatten out before reaching the city.  The increased elevation also increasing bow distance, and you must remember that a half mile in randland is 500 paces, which is the distance the two Rivers Bows reach on flat ground.  A regular bow would be effective from an elevated position  at that range.  As to your other bow question on Egwene's side; that seemed more a knee-jerk reaction by the soldiers. Even though the Aes Sedai did step out onto the bridge, she was most likely still out of range.

The Sitters being in two places at once does seem off, although I suppose the Sitters could have been allowed to Travel back to the Hall to make preparations for Egwene's arrival, while Egwene rode to the Tower to give them the time to prepare.

I may be completely off-base on most or all of these counts, but the lack of some key information makes it impossible to verify if these are, in fact, continuity errors, or just misunderstandings.



I wanted to write something profound here, but I couldn't think of anything.

Cynewulf

  • Level 3
  • ***
  • Posts: 53
  • Fell Points: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Alright guys, more inconsistencies I need explained
« Reply #17 on: March 23, 2010, 12:28:40 PM »
No, it would make absolutely no sense for the tower guard to set up a blockade at the end of the bridge, because Gareth Bryne's army has been holding all of the bridge towns since CoT. Bryne would never allow the tower guard to cross the bridge and set up a blockade at the foot of the bridge, as that would be the same as allowing a sneak sortie from the city intended to reconquer the bridge town and get trade running to TV again. Bryne had the bridge towns under control, and this makes no sense at all. It is actually Bryne who would have barricades up in that location. This is from Dominic at the 13th depository:

"[Bryne would have had] sentries watching for any activity at the gates, half a mile away on the other side of the bridges. He also had sentries at posts near the shore to the north and south keeping a close watch on activity in the harbours (that's the sentry posts from which Egwene and Leane took boats in [COT]) . Bryne also had reserve camps between the bridge towns, in case Chubain attempted a sortie to take back a bridge town. His personal tent was in one of those camps, one on the western shore. His outposts and scouts on the eastern shore were the ones facing sneak attacks by the Younglings."

Also, he proposes this: "A more reasonable set up for the final meeting of Rebels and Loyalists would have been to get the Tower Guard to advance in front of the Sitters on the bridge and set up lines not at the gate of Tar Valon (this is completely useless) but on the bridge itself, in sight of Alindaer, to protect the retreat of the Sitters in case something went wrong (they could ride to the barricades and then Travel away). Mind you, a barricade is rather useless. The Aes Sedai didn't really fear being attacked by Bryne's men, and many Sitters have come and gone freely from Alindaer for months to negotiate with the Rebel envoys in tents set up near the foot of the bridge."

Sanderson had pretty big problems overall with the layout of Tar Valon, the surrounding area and the siege. Among other things, he completely changed the layout of the army and AS camps, making Bryne's tactics fairly nonsensical. I, for one, cannot understand how they managed to ship the book with so many errors in this one particular area, yet the reason is likely lack of time for Sanderson to do proper research, and lack of time for Alan and Maria to find and correct them. Still, that they overlooked the bad problems the Tar Valon area had been stuck with, is actually a bit amazing.

darxbane

  • Level 17
  • *
  • Posts: 839
  • Fell Points: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Alright guys, more inconsistencies I need explained
« Reply #18 on: March 25, 2010, 09:16:10 PM »
You are absolutely right, it wouldn't make sense to put a blockade at the end of the bridge, that's why it was built on the Tar Valon side, not the town side of the bridge.  If it was on the town side, Bryne and Egwene would have had to ride around it to get on the bridge.  One of the Sitters walks out in front of the blockade, and needs to use the one power to amplify her voice in order to be heard, which Egwene also needs to do to respond.  if the blockade was at the base of the bridge Egwene and the Sitters would have been standing a few feet from each other, and had no reason to amplify their voices. I read this scene again last night, and I just don't get what you are saying.  I could be blinded by fanboyism, but I doubt it. 
I have no idea what Dominic means by his proposal; you don't advance your soldiers onto a choke point when you are besieged; you hang back and let the attacking army come to you, especially when you are so completely outnumbered.  The Sitters who invited Egwene to become Amyrlin were never more than a few feet away from the main gate of Tar Valon, safely out of bowshot, and easily able to skitter back behind the barricade if the army advanced.  Also, since Egwene and company were actually at that bridge with the expressed purpose of beginning the assault, I'd say the Sitters had something to be concerned about.

I have no comment about the camp being rearranged.  Could you provide examples of this? I think I read somewhere that the town names were reversed at one point, but I don't remember.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2010, 09:17:56 PM by darxbane »
I wanted to write something profound here, but I couldn't think of anything.