Brooks, IMHO doesn't belong in the same group with Eddings et al. He is better categorized with Lewis and Tolkien, because he focuses more on the poetics of the story and the world than character development of storytelling. He does it well but is not really part of the same movement with Eddings, Feist, Salvatore and Morcock. For the record this group is not characteristic of 90's fiction. They were a feature of the 80's.
Jordan could be described as an aeration because the scope and scale of WoT subsumes the four authors I cited, blends their master works and improves on them with characterization that is the foundation of what Books refers to as "current" fantasy.
Book two seems to wrap up the real prologue, and for those with literary HADD it comes across as the high point. But, when you realize that WoT is really only one novel and relax enough to accept a volumes-long story arc, you can see that no one of the volumes is really much better or worse than the others. They all serve a niche that is required by the story. A tale like this can't be endless car chases, flashing lights and explosions. Short and quick or even suspenseful dramatic is not always the best choice. When the only tool in your box is a hammer, you see the whole world as nothing but nails.
But then, I've only read the entire series 6 times or so, so I may be being hasty with my assessment. ;P
